Re: [tied] Re: derivation rules from later latin to romanian

m_iacomi wrote:

>
>> As for Latin *f- from PIE *dh- .... hmm. I don't want to make any
>> comment in the case of Pokorny #380 and Pokorny #381 :-))
>
> You are not supposed to make any comment on a phonetic law you
> obviously ignore (about Italic exitus of initial PIE voiced aspirated
> stops).

voiced aspirated stops became devoiced aspirated stops and later
fricatives. Are you talking about this rule in Italic?

> About Pokorny 380 there is nothing to be said relative to
> this discussion. Pokorny 376 & 381 hint out that Latin words are not
> related to the same root. Albanian word is not inherited and cannot
> be used in speculations about supposed substratal word similar to
> Latin "familia". The same Pokorny 381 hints out that PIE *dh > Alb.
> /dj/ (in "djalë"), no way for /f/, end of the story.
>
> Marius Iacomi

Well, I wonder about:
1)which is the etymology of Albanian "foshnje"= Säugling, and Romanian
"fecior"= son;
2)I do not forget that Albanian as living languages has an /th/ versus
/f/ ( therrmë/ferrimë): voiced aspirated-stops became devoiced aspirated
stops and then fricatives. (dh > th> f). Is Albanian an Italic language?

regards,