Re: Romanian -Albanian Genetic Link ( c /ts/ - story)

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "alexandru_mg3"
<alexandru_mg3@...> wrote:

> Hello Abdullah,
> I want to thanks you a lot for your clarifications.
>
> Please tell me also, if possible:
>
> 1. Could you help me with some Latin Loans in Albanians that

should

> give in Romanian a c /ts/ (in Romanian c is expecially a reflex of
> Lat. "tia" or "tiu")
> In order to check the stability of alb. "t-" (or the

apparition

> of an "-s") in these loans.

[AK]

All I remember and renew now for this purpouse are these words,
probably of Latin origin:

1. christianus > (g.) i kërshtenë/ (t.) i kërshterë;
2. latinus > lti:, but
3. petia > pjesë 'part'
4. Martius > Mars 'March'
5. initio, -are > nis 'to start'

> 2. When and in what conditions /f/ > /th/ appears in Albanian ?

[AK]

It's hard to say any thing for sure, but I know that /f/ <==> /th/
is very common in Albanian. For example, Alb. <i thellë> 'deep',
probably of IE origin *k^oil-os (cf. Greek <koilos>), has its
variant /i fellë/, mostly in south dialect, dominant in compound
<zgafellë> 'hole, cavity', but <këthjelloj> 'to clarify'. Cf. also
(t.) <thëllëzë>, (g.) <fëllanzë> 'partridge'. It seems that it is
more dialectal characteristic, unindependent of certain
circumstances.

> 3. alb. thump - (rom. ciump) is correct or a typo too?

[AK] No, it is OK.

> Thanks again,
> marius alexandru
>
> P.S. : a) alb. thumbullë - is the spelling used by Rosetti in ILR
> II. Thanks for the correction.
> b) for Alb. <pësoj> we have in romanian : p~aTi (only for
> information)
>
>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Abdullah Konushevci"
> <a_konushevci@...> wrote:
> > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "alexandru_mg3"
> <alexandru_mg3@...>
> > wrote:
> > > Hello All,
> > >
> > > Lat. ti/te -> Alb. ti/t- (ti is stable)
> > > ----------------------------------------
> > > capitina -> kaptinë (see. Rom c~ap~at,^in~a )
> > > inglutire -> gëlltis (see. Rom ^inghit,i )
> > [AK]
> > By all chances, Alb. <gëlltis> 'to swallow', present only in

south

> > dialect, is a Slavic loan, probably of Bulg. <g<am> 'id.'
> > About second word <kaptinë> 'head, chapter, peak',
> > <kaptell> 'pomell', <kaptoj> 'to pass over s.th., to jump' I

doubt

> > that here we have to deal much more with inherited word,

suffixed

> in -
> > ina, -ell, -onj.
> > >
> > > (I tried to put here words that exists also in Romanian)
> > >
> > >
> > > b) Type 2 of Latin loans (t+1):
> > > Lat. ti /te -> Alb. c > s
> > > -----------------------------------------
> > > Lat. palatium -> Alb. pëllas (thanks to Alex)
> > > Lat. patire -> Alb. psoj
> > > Lat. servitium -> Alb. shërbesë
> > > Lat. vitium -> Alb. ves
> > > Lat. ratione -> Alb. arsye
> > > Lat. puteu -> Alb. pus
> > [AK]
> > Lat. patior 'to suffer' > Alb. <pësoj> 'id.' is very suspicious,
> > because, we have a prefixed form pë-soj (cf. pë-shurr 'to piss,

to

> > urinate', deverbative of <shurrë< 'urine', pë-shtyj 'to spit',
> > shtyj 'to push'), besides mësoj 'to learn', a prefixal

derivative

> of
> > pësoj, probably of Greek origine <manthano> 'id.'
> > <shërbesë> is denominal of <shërbenj> from Lat. servio, -ire,
> through
> > bilabialization of the vowel, like in salvo, -are > shëlboj 'to
> > liberate', but <shëlbyes> 'Salvator, Liberator'.
> >
> > >
> > > As expected (see /3/ case) this shows us the same

reflexe

> of
> > c
> > > as for Romanian but on another axes c^ -> c -> s, where a /c/
> > exists
> > > at the 'next' moment of time.
> > >
> > > So I localized this second type of loans on the 't+1 moment'

(d-

> > > period) of the axes *k'w or k'W ( at that moment the 2 axes

have

> > > already merged):
> > >
> > > a b c | d | e
> > > --- --- ---- ------ ---
> > > *k'w > *c'W > *c^ > *c > s
> > > *kW /+ > *c'W > *c^ > *c > s
> > >
> > > This also fit very well my assumptions.
> > >
> > > NOTE : the periodization between different

transformations

> is
> > > not yet established...
> > >
> > > Conclusion : the c reflexes in Latin Loans verifies

again

> (as
> > > in case of /3/) the assumption : that Romanian and Albanian
> derived
> > > from a Common Language.
> > >
> > > PIE Common Language Albanian
> > > *k^ ---*c'------- *c ------------------> T / t
> > > | Romanian
> > > ----- c --------- c
> > >
> > > Also it verifies the observation that the Romanization

of

> > > Romanians start earlier than the Romanization of Albanians.
> > >
> > >
> > > 3.a Albanian and Romanian common words that reflect the Alb.
> > T /th/
> > > --------------------------------------------------------------

---

> --
> > > I will check the conclusion above on the Albanian-Romanian
> > common
> > > words:
> > >
> > > The reflexes of Albanian T (th) - are the following in
> Romanian
> > > (see Rosseti ILR II):
> > > 1. rom. t, /c/ <-> th /T/
> > > 2. rom. s /s/ <-> th /T/
> > > 3. rom. ci /c^/ <-> th /T/
> > > 4. rom. f /f/ <-> th /T/
> > >
> > >
> > > 1. rom. c /t,/ <-> alb. T /th/
> > > ---------------------------
> > > t,eap~a <-> thep
> > > t,arc <-> thark
> > >
> > > This fit once again the conclusion above (see Latin
> loans):
> > >
> > > PIE Common Language Albanian
> > > *k' ---- c' ------ c ---- ------> T ----> T /t
> > > | Romanian
> > > --- c --- c
> > >
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > > marius alexandru
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > P.S. : the other Albanian-Romanian common words that reflect

Alb.

> T
> > > have to be explained by other rules :
> > >
> > > 2. rom. s <-> alb. th (reflect the transformation of a PIE

*sw

> > > based on the correspondances of rom.s <-> alb. th, as in :
> > >
> > > a) rom. s^ambure <-> alb. thumbullë (AlbRom. Common
> > > Language *sumbure)
> >
> > [AK]
> > I am not aware of any <thumbull>. Probably typo for Alb.
> > <sumbull> 'button, tinsel, bud'.
> >
> > >
> > > b) rom. cursa <-> alb. kurthë (AlbRom. Common
> > > Language *cursua )
> > >
> > > c) rom. sarb~ad <-> alb. i tharbëd (AlbRom. Common
> > > Language *suarb- )
> > >
> > > (note : rom. sarb~ad != rom. searb~ad)
> > >
> > > 3. rom. c^ /ci/ <-> alb. T /th/
> > >
> > > As in :
> > > rom. ciump <-> alb. thump
> > >
> > > Still unexplained, based on the Piotr transformations:
> > >
> > > It reflects a transformation :
> > > ? -> c^ -> c -> T (in Albanian)
> > > c^ -> c^ -> c^ (in Romanian )
> > > starting from a common c^.
> > >
> > > but I cannot say more or to arrive to the PIE.
> > >
> > >
> > > 4. rom. f <-> alb. th
> > >
> > > rom. f~ar^am~a <-> alb. thërime
> >
> > In Alb. <thërrime>, an expressive plural, we have a change /f/
> > > /th/, like in <thëmijë>, besides <fëmijë> from Lat. <familia>.
> >
> > Konushevci