Terminology (Re: Piotr-)

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

> Piotr Gasiorowski wrote:
> >> I wonder how you wonder. They are the satem forms of the IE

root. Why

> >> should I mention the centum forms here? Comparation should be

done

> >> within the same group in this case, imho.
> >
> > What was the point of your listing all those Satem forms? The

people

> > potentially interested in this discussion know them better than

you

> > do.
>
> I understand it so: because there are people which - if interested-

they

> knoow the reflexes of a certain PIE root in the actualy languages,

there

> is no need to show any forms when I compare something. OK, I will

keep

> it in my mind.
>
> >> The coresponding sound of Alb. /dh/ is not Rom. /dz/ or /z/ but
> >> simply /d/
> >> Alb-Rom: hurdhë - leurdã; shkardhë - zgardã
> >
> > Partly inaccurate, and completely irrelevant. We are not talking

about

> > _these_ <dh>'s.
> >
> >> The Alb. /d/ should be the result of PIE *g^ and *g^h ( Pekmezi,

Gr.

> >> Alb. Spr. 29)
> >> And for this example I shoued by myself the PIE *g^her- which

gave in

> >> Alb. "dorë" and in Rom. "ghearã".
> >
> > ??? -- The PIE word was actually *g^Hesr. (check the archive), and
> > <ghearã> has nothing to do with it.
>
> I am speaking about PIE *g^her- which as phonetic form and meaning

is

> exactly what I expect for the Romanian "ghearã"
>
> >
> > Thus, the Albanian form of
> >> '*h2arg^-es-jo-' should have been '*ardes-'. No /s/, no /z/ but
> >> simply "d".
> >
> > /d/ _and_ /ð/ (<dh>), actually, and the latter is regular

after /r/

> > (I've written about this before!). In a similar context we have

Alb.

> > bardhë 'white' < *bHr.h2g^-. The substratal cognate in Romanian is
> > <barzã> -- you _do_ see the <z>, right?
>
> No.I don't see the "z" there _as you see it_. And you know why? And

I

> will ask you something. Which is the reason to not compare words

with

> the same phonetical aspect _and_ the same semantism but you want to
> compare words with the same phonetism but not related semantic ?

Because

> someone explained that it is possible from "white" to make a bird

just

> because this bird has more white as black? Why don't you compare
> "bãrzãune" with the feminine form in Alb. "bardhë" then ?
> I wonder how easy one will to link the words with each other.As for

me,

> I am not at all convinced that Romanian "barzã"(stork) is the same

as

> Albanian word in its feminine gender "bardhë" (white).
> In fact the word "stork" is in Rom. Lang too and this is "stârc"

and the

> another form is "cocostârc".The "stârc" form is given as comming

from

> Slavic " strUkU"
>
>
> Question: do you have any idea how many birds's denominations in

Rom.

> Lang. end in "-zã"? Do you know how many of them have a similar
> counterpart in Albanian?
>
>
> We normally find Rom /z/
> > (dialectal /dz/) in substratal words that have Albanian cognates

with

> > /d/~/ð/ from *g^(H). I take the affricate *dz (partly surviving in
> > Romanian) to have been an intermediate stage between PIE *g^(H)

and

> > Mod.Alb. /d/~/ð/.
> >
> > Piotr
>
> I am afaid the PIE *g^h has given "g" "ghe" or "ghi" in Rom

depending on

> what kind of vowel followed this group. The "dz" and "z" in Rom is

for

> me stil not entire clear. I have stil to search about.
>
> Alex

************
Extended form *str.g-. stork, from Old English storc, stork (probably
from the stiff movements of the bird), from Germanic *sturkaz. 2.
strut, from Old English strtian, to stand out stiffly, from Germanic
*strt-. (Watkins, ster-1)
In Alb. this extended zero-grade form *str.g- derives also
<shtërg> 'stork', through regular evolution of cluster /st/ > /sht/
and /r./ > ri > ër.
I must confess too that also in Albanian are many bird's names in
diminutive suffix -zë/-za: <pupëz, pupza> 'crested lark, turtle
dove', <shqitëz, shqitëza> 'swan', etc.

Konushevci