Re: [tied] Samus -> Zomus : Albanian transformation?

alexandru_mg3 wrote:

> Hello All,
> Could you validate if the transformation :
>
> Samus (sec I en) -> Zomus ( sec XII en) represents a normal
> Albanian transformation. (In my opinion, yes, it represents).
>
> "Qui cum fugeret, properans ad castrum suum iuxta fluuium
> Zomus positum, milites Tuhutum audaci cursu persequentes, ducem
> Geloum iuxta fluuium Copus interfecerunt."
>
> Some additional validation - could be :
> A valid Latin transformation ? (in my opinion no)
> A Slavic one ? (in my opinion no)
> A Germanic one ? (in my opinion no)
>
> If we have an afirmative answer, this could indicate that an
> Albanoid population (a Dacian population) survive in Transylvania
> between sec I AC - sec XI AC.
>
> Best Regards,
> marius alexandru

Samus > Zomus does not looks as a valid change in Albanian.
the "s" from Roman times > "sh" in Albanian
the "u" from "-um", "-us" at end of the word generated "-ëm" in
Albanian, se Latin "balsamum" > "balshëm"
(short "u">"ë", long "u:" > "y" as in amicus > myk

The initial sequence "sa" >" shë" in Albanian like in "sanctus"

>"shënt" but there is an exception considered

that "sa-" >"za" as in "sabulum" >"zall" where I think the etymology
given by Mihaescu is wrong.

Due the known soundlaws I should say that apparently the ancient
"Samus" should have yelded "*Shëmë" in Alb. but not "Zomus".

Alex