Re: [tied] Latin verus

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "alex" <alxmoeller@...> wrote:

> Piotr Gasiorowski wrote:
> > 19-07-03 16:06, alex wrote:
> >
> >> The Albanian form "kushëri" does not seem to derive from the
> >> *cosinus, even wit the rothacism of "n"..
> >
> > More seriously, you should consider the whole Albanian set: Tosk

m.

> > <kushëri> (indef.), <kushëriri> (def.), pl. <kushërinj>, f.
> > <kushërirë> (indef.) etc. Even without examining the Geg

counterparts

> > with non-rhotacised /n/ it's clear that something like *kusurín-
> > (exactly as in Arumanian) underlies it all. Of course the
> > corresponding Vulgar Latin form is the fuller *co(n)sobrínu- not

the

> > compositionally abbreviated *cosínu-.
> >
> > Piotr
>
>
> That will speak for a loan from Aromanian. The same is sustained

for

> Albanian "kuvent". If I am not too wrong I guess Rosetti explained

that

> this is a loan from Aromanian into Albanian.
>
> Alex

************
Did Rosetti mention other Latin loans in Albanian: kungoj <
consecrare 'to give the sacrament to', ngushëlloj < n- +
consolor 'to condole with, to sympathize with', (g.) kunorë, (t.)
kurorë < conora < corona (met. r - n > n -r) and kundër <
contra 'against'?
As you may see, all these <con->-words in unstressed closed syllable
ended in the Albanian as <ku(n)->. So, why kuvend < Lat. conventum
and kushërin < Lat. consobrinus are the loans from Aromanian?

Konushevci
Konushevci