From: Vassil Karloukovski
Message: 24548
Date: 2003-07-15
--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@...> wrote:
...
> What we observe is SCr. kuc'a "house", Bulg. k&s^ta "house"
> (Macedonian [West-Bulgarian, if you prefer] kak'a, kok'a, kuk'a,
> k&nk'a).
the k', g' (kuk'a, svek'a) in literary Macedonian, based on the
central dialects of Prilep, are generally regarded as late Serbian
influence. For example, the toponymy even around Prilep still
preserves the old forms - Krivogashtani (from gashti "trousers" as
opposed to the now literary gak'i).
The Serbo-Croatian word, if inherited, can conceivably
> go back to *ku(k)tja or *ko~(k)tja. The Bulgarian word, if
> inherited, can go back to *ko~(k)tja or *kU(k)tja. The only
> common form is *ko~(k)tja, which also happens to be the only
> one that can explain the Macedonian forms (assuming k&nk'a
> exists in the Kostur area, I'm not sure)
it is k&shcha in Southern Macedonia (Kostur/Kastoria). And the form,
attested since the Xth c. is k&shta "tent", as it is in modern
Bulgarian.
Regards,
Vassil
, and on top of that,
> also the forms in other Slavic languages.
>
> I can see no reason at all why one shouldn't accept the
> common prototype *kontja, unless for purposes of special
> pleading (and even then, it will be pleading in vain).
>
>
> =======================
> Miguel Carrasquer Vidal
> mcv@...