[tied] Re: vulgar Latin?

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@...> wrote:

> On Thu, 01 May 2003 00:52:38 +0000, Abdullah Konushevci
> <a_konushevci@...> wrote:
>
> >I hope that You will agree that in Indo-Iranic branch, the PIE

root

> >for water was *ab- (cf. abdes, Turkish form of Persian compound <
> >ab 'water' and dast 'hand', hoshab < Pers. hosh 'good' and
> >ab 'water', gülab < Pers. gül 'rose' and ab 'water', abi 'blu',

etc.)

>
> The Indo-Iranian root is actually *ap- (Skt. a:p-, ap-, Av. a:fs^,
> ap-). A root *ab- does seem to exist in Celtic *abon- "river,
> stream", but it is best explained as *h2ap-h1on- (or *h2ap-h3on-),
> "having water". A root *h2ap- would not give Albanian av(-ull) or
> Rom. (through pre-Albanian) abur(e).
>
> =======================
> Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
> mcv@...

************
Yes, but *ab-, as Celtic proves it, is just, I guess, a voiced
variant form.
In Albanian, its at most common that the syllabe ab- in the beginnig
of the words to become av-: Abdes, but Alb. avdes, Turkish
abdall 'crazy', but Alb. avdall, also, probabely under the impact of
Byzantine Greek, we have Avetare, instead of Abetare.
So, my doubt that Romanian variant abur is much older is not without
a basis.
At the end, I am very interested why the root *ap- or, lets take the
*h2ap-, would not give Albanian av(-ull) or Rom. (through pre-
Albanian) abur(e), if we know that *a (short wovel) gives regulary
Albanian a.

Konushevci