Abdullah Konushevci wrote:
>> Albanian form "h�rm.shor" is a contracted form. For this is the
>> word "harm�sar" in Rom. a clear testimony, so *harma should be the
>> word you mean (with no final consonant) with two suffixes:
>> *harma+su+or
>> "su" as locative suffix as you say and "-or" as nominem agentis.
>> Apparently it doesn't make too much light here, or do you see an
> way
>> to explain the meaning and the way it developed?
>>
> [AK]
> Present participle passive in -mo <harm>, derived from *H1org^h-mo
> is regular outcome (see even in standard Albanian <pam.je> 'view',
> <m�sym.je> 'attack'), so I am not aware of any <harma> or other
> variants.
>
is that so regular? If yes , was that outcome in ProtoAlbanian an "-ma" this
participle passive?If it wasn't, then it cannot explain Rom. "a" in "-mas-"
since "o" does not become "a" in Rom. We will have in fact the same
diference of the vocalism as in "maz�re" versus "modhulle" where the Rom.
"a" shows an older stage of the word as the Alb. "o". One has to ask here if
the actualy "-mo" does come from an older "-ma". If yes, then the derivation
should be possible. Further one should think at "g^hm" > "gm" > "mn" > "m"
as for instance pigmentum > pam�nt (for avoiding questions of the romanistic
school: it is my own idea that Latin "pigmentum" can be a better candidate
for Rom. "p�m�nt" as the clasic "pavimentum"). The change seems posible, but
more exampl of "gm", "g^m", "g^hm" which should consolidate the cange of
"gm" to "m" wont be bad.
Alex