Re: [tied] Re: Late Proto Albanian *3 /dz/ = Early Proto Romanian

Piotr Gasiorowski wrote:

> 04-02-04 19:48, alex wrote:
>
>> Under the marge of error which can appearsdue the accepted Latimons
>> (Latimons= Latin etynoms) as being the roots for the Albanian roots,
>> there is no /di:/ > PAlb "something". The reflexes of Latin "di:"
>> are simply "0".
>
> Inherited *di(:)- survives e.g. in Albanian: di 'know' < *di:- <
> *dHih2-, dit� < *di:t- < *dih2-t- (from *deih2- 'shine'). Intervocalic
> *-d- in native words is treated in the same way as Latin -d-, i.e.
> lost no matter what vowel follows. I can't think of any examples of
> Latin loans with initial /di:-/ except di:rigo: --> d�rgoj. Of course
> you may demand me to rule out the development *di > *3i > di, but I
> _have_ ruled it out for intervocalic *-d-, and there's no reason to
> believe that only word-initial *d- was palatalised.
>
> Piotr

Excuse me, I thought it will be automatically understood as "intervocalic "
"di" and not in initial position. In initial position even the Latin "di" is
kept with the form "dj" generaly. You cannot think at any example of Latin
/di:/ iniinitial position because there is no one.
The only word "di:cere" is in compositium ( maledi:cere, benedi:cere >
mallkoy, bekoj)
The initial "d" is non palatalised as well since there is "dj" = "di", isn't
it? (discaptare, diabolu > diktoy, djall)

Alex