Re: [tied] Proto-Albanian

Piotr Gasiorowski wrote:

>> "modhullë, vjedhullë" but "mugull, sumbull/thumbull" ?
>
> *-el- could have different gender variants (m. *-elos, n. *-elom, f.
> *-elah2), producing Alb. -ull/-ullë. Why Romanian has consistently
> <-ure> (or <-ãre>) rather than <-urã>, I can only speculate. Most
> likely the Proto-Romanians treated words in <-ull(ë)> as consonantal
> stems (as if they were Lat. words with an acc.sg. in *-ulem). Cf.
> Balkan Latin *padu:lem (from metathesised <palu:dem>), which became
> Alb. *pëyll > pyll but Romanian *padule > padure
>
> Piotr

The semantic shift + methathesis in this word sounds not very nice to
me. From Latin "sumpf" to Romanian and Albanian "forest" , specialy for
people who have been supposed to live long time in Mountains ( well, in
the forest) it seems unlikely.
If Albanian lost an intervocalic "d" then padu:lem > paule. how is the
"ëy" from (pëyll) to explain here?
Piotr, does any root you remember of looks like *ped-, *pad- and fits
semanticaly with forest?
the *ped= feet shouldn't fit:)