From: alex
Message: 25986
Date: 2003-09-24
>> ************Why you compare "qeth" and "ngjeth"?.Why they shoud be related to each
>> O-grade form of the verb *kleu- `to hear' derives in Albanian
>> quej/quaj `to call, to name' <kluej (Buzuku) < klounj < *k^lou-
> enyo.
>> But, prefixed form *ndi-k^lou-enyo derives: (g.) ndigoj, nigoj,
> ngoj,
>> (t.) dëgjoj `to hear'. So, under the impact of the prefix *ndi-/ndë-
>
>> <*ant-bhi- (cf. mbë-/mbi- <*ambhi/m.bhi-), PIE verb *k^leu- firstly
>> underwent further palatalization *k^l- > kl- > q and, secondly, in
>> other envirmont, *k^l- > gl- > (g.) g- and (t.) gj- (for
> alternation q>gj before prefix n-, cf. Alb. <qeth> 'to cut' and
> <ngjeth> 'to give the creeps, to make (s.o.) shiver', both from *kaH-
> id- 'to strike, tu cut'). In Slavic, from
>> extended o-grade form *k^lous- > k^lus- we have probably
>> <sluati> `to hear'. I am not sure, but I guess it is so.
>> For this reason, I don't see any problem why *ndi-k^lou-enyo could
>> derives in Albanian <dëgjoj> `to hear', and why not *ndi-gWet-yo
>> couldn't derives <ngjes> `to glue'.
>> Maybe Mr. Rasmussen or Mr. Vidal could help us in explaining such
>> phenomenon.
>> P.S. To be correct, until now, Albanian verb <dëgjoj> `to hear' was
>> treated as loan from Latin <intellegere>, without taking into
> account
>> different dialectal forms of the verb.
>>
>> Konushevci