Re: Hat

From: tgpedersen
Message: 50313
Date: 2007-10-16

--- In, Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@...> wrote:
> On 2007-10-16 23:14, alexandru_mg3 wrote:
> > Because the c^ of Romanian /k&c^ul&/ 'hat' cannot be originated on
> > the s of MLat casula , /k&c^ul&/ cannot be 'derived' from MLat casula
> > only the invers relation could be true...
> >
> > But maybe your point was related only to MLat <casula>?
> What I suggested was that the Med.Lat. word could be a loan from
> something like Albanian, with *c^ already changed into a fricative,
> while the Romanian word would reflect the original Proto-Albanian
> pronunciation. I hope you like it this way.
> > Having a Subtratual /k&c^-ul&/ from *kaT-tó- (with a direct
> > cognate Latin cassis 'helmet' and an indirect one *kaT-nó-
> > (Germanic "hat")) : we have in /k&c^ul&/ 'the live output' of the
> > Dental+Dental in Proto-Albanian...If true, this is quite
> > least for me.
> If true, it would nicely support the view that the regular Albanian
> reflex of *-t-t- is indeed -s-, and that something like *-c^- was
> one of the stages in this development.

But Lat. corylus, Eng. hazel; Da. has "hull of nut" (and even worse,
No. hams id., as if from the PIE *kem- "cover", Grm. Hemd, Sp. camisa
(< *camitia?)) are left by the wayside, if we don't find a way of
getting that pesky -s-/-ss-/-t-/-tt- alternation placed under Germanic
and Latin; Dacian-like substrate??