Re: [tied] Re: substratum

25-06-03 23:05, g wrote:

>>The Albanian forms <modhullë> ~ <modullë> resulted from extending older
>
> Is there a rotacism rule for Romanian--Albanian correspondences?
> (these examples, modullë - mazãre, vjedhullë - viezure "badger,"
> but bollë - balaur [ba-lá-ur])

Rhotacism is the rule (e.g. <brushtullë> : <brusture>, <avull> :
<abure>, of course also in Latin words, e.g. <pyll> : <pãdure>). <mal>
(Alb. 'mountain', Rom 'shore') probably had geminate *-ll- < *-ln-. I'm
not sure how to analyse the <bollë> : <balaur> correspondence.

> But how would the relationship Alb. madh <-> Rum. mare "big & large &
> great" look like? As in the former we see a [d] or [z] > dh, and in the
> latter an [VrV] (as a rhotacization of __?). (BTW, are these madh
> and mare related to Ind. maha (maharadja, Mahavishnu, Mahatma)?)

I wrote about that pair yesterday. I don't believe they are related (but
yes, <madh> is related to Gk. mega, Skt. maha-, Eng. mickle/much, etc.;
its <dh> is a reflex of *g^). See:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/23793


Piotr