Abdullah Konushevci wrote:
> In your examples, the cluster is /-nt-/ (nasal plus stop). My
> <sagitta> example
> shows rather clearly what happened to Lat. -itta. To sum up:
>
> *meletta --> m(ë)ljetë > *bljetë > bletë (loss of glide after /bl-/)
>
> Piotr
> ************
> In best case, liquid-plus-palatal glide should be derived in palatal
> glide: fëmijë < Lat. familia `child, baby', bijë < bilja `doughter',
> bujar < boljar (cf. Buzmi bujar `generous Buzmi"), both wll attested
> in different dialects , even Slavic nevolja > nevojë `need'
>
> Konushevci
Hmmm.. I have a question regarding Slavic "nevolja".
the word in Rom. is the same as in Albanian , meaning "nevoie"= need.
There are tough the following words:
nevolnic, nevolnicie, but too nevoiash, nevoit.
I ask myself if the words whithout "l" are from Slavic or not since
there it seems to be a construct like:
ne+voie.
Voie= wish. DEX gives "voie"= frm slavic "volja"
In the same time, DEX gives "nevolnic" from slavic "nevolinU" or "ne" +"
volnic".
There is also the word "volnic" in Rom. which is from slavic " volinU".
So, there are two posiblities:
there is a substrate word = voie like germanic "wish"
there is the slavic word entering proto-albanian & proto-romanian at a
time when "l" became palatalised and asibilated in the next "i" and in
the same time, the words enterd once again the languages after the
palatalisation of "l" stopped.
I guess the true slavic words are "volnic" and "nevolnic".
"voie" "Nevoie", "voinic", "nevoiaS" & Co are in an older layer and they
belong maybe to the 0 grade of *u:en[e], in this case directly from
*u:e-.
To the extended form of the root ( *u:en[e]) are the germanic variants
winne, win, wusc, wunsch, venna, etc...