[tied] Re: Albanian valle 'circular dance'

-------------------------------------------------------------------
d) remain the adaptation to the Rom. feminine ending:
PAlb *walwo- - Rom. horuo-ã
(final 'ã' being the fem. undef. form in Romanian)

I come back again and tell you that I didn't add anything new:
we have here : ruo-ã from *hworwo + ã so we don't have Only 'rwu' as
you show me and talk about it...
The most closer phonetism that I could found in Romanian for this
cluster of 3 vowels is:
a) 'rouã' (with exactly an 'r' context, only the stressed is
different)
-------------------------------------------------------------------

I want to complete myself and to explain why I think that the
cluster *rwoã in an 'unstressed context' is instable in Romanian and
should give 'ã' at the end of a feminin word.

a) Rom. clusters 'o-wã' and 'wo-ã' in a "stressed context"
-----------------------------------------------------
First I want to show that the cluster 'o-wã' is interchangeable in
Romanian with the (less stable) cluster 'wo-ã' (that is a regional
variant)

See Rom. 'ouã' eng. 'eggs' with the regional variant
'uoã' (regionalism - Dej region (Cluj County))

Also Rom. 'nouã' 'pers. pron. 'we' dativ form'
(with its variant 'nuoã' in thje same region)

Note : in general 'wo' was reduced to 'o' in Romanain so we have
for the regional variant above also as:
'o-ã' 'eggs'
'no-ã' dativ 'we'
(see Turda region (Cluj county) for the variants above)

b) Rom. cluster rowã and *rwoã in a 'stressed context'
-----------------------------------------------
Rom. cluster 'rouã' in 'a stressed context' /r'o-wã/ wasn't
reduced - or transformed because we have exactly the same cluster
kept in today Romanian word 'rouã' /r'o-wã/ eng. 'dew'

So this example clearly shows us that in a stressed position this
cluster is not reduced and wasn't transformed to something else.

There are no words in Romanian that show the clusters
*rwoã or *roã

As I told to Piotr Rom. 'rouã' is the closest phonetic context
that I could found based on the explanation that I gave on the point
a)

c) Rom. cluster *ruoã in a 'unstressed context'
-----------------------------------------------
In *hwo-rwo+ã ('ã'-fem ending) we have a single syllable '-rwoã'
in an unstressed position that contains 'woã'.
This cluster 'woã' cannot be pronounced in Romanian in a single
syllable.
Of course for such instable cluster we cannot have attested
examples.
This cluster cannot survive so it was reduced immediately.

To what?
We can make only logical deductions regarding the order of these
reductions based on the known rules:

a) Scenario-1: first oã > ã (due to 'oã' as impossible diphtong)
*rwoã > (oã>ã 'oã' impossible diphtong) > *rwã > *rwo > *ro >
(adaptation to fem. ending) > rã

(for Rom. wã > wo > o see Rom. nuor>nor eng. 'cloud'
and unã>uã>uo>o eng 'a' (fem.))

b) Scenario-2: first wo > o (see above)
*rwoã > (wo ->o) > *roã (oã>ã 'oã' impossible diphtong.) > rã
(also adaptation to fem. ending)

In both scenarios, the reduction order doesn't matter, and the
final ouput is 'ã'.

The first Scenario is more probable in my opinion.

I hope that with the arguments above to eliminate the last doubts
regarding the derivation of:

Rom. 'hora' 'circular dance' from : PAlb *walwo: (< PIE *wel-7)
(<-> Alb. valle) 'id.'

Only the Best,
marius

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

>
>
> Hello Piotr,
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> "You do well to respect DEX; it's a pity you don't accept the
> etymology of <horã> given there."
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> Of course that I respect DEX. I tried to learn or at least to
> consult each of its etymologies. And I respect you too: as a person
> from where I learned new things...
> But to respect somebody doesn't mean that he is always rigth (I
> have other clear example of PAlb *w - Rom o - Alb *v so hora is not
> an isolated case).
> But even in this case (or especially in this case), the respect
> that I keep is the same...so for me DEX is a reference book.
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------
> Rom. 'hora' from PAlb *walwo:-
> -------------------------------------------------------------
> Now to resume the discussion: Rom. 'hora' from PAlb *walwo:
> Romanian Rules are:
> a) Rom. 'o' from PAlb 'wa -> there is no doubt.
> (see Rosetti unã<*uã<uo(attested)<o)
>
> b) rothacism (no doubt)
>
> c) "prothetic h" in Romanian *huo > *uo
> I already posted :
> harmasar / armasar
>
> now I can add:
> hurui / urui
> huTa / uTa (see DEX for all these forms)
>
> So to answer to your question: are there other examples of
> prothetic 'h' in Romanian? Yes, they are see above.
> Is possible 'huo' < 'uo' in Romanian ? Yes it is.
> I hope that we can close this topic as Ok now.
>
>
> d) remain the adaptation to the Rom. feminine ending:
> PAlb *walwo- - Rom. horuo-ã
> (final 'ã' being the fem. undef. form in Romanian)
>
> I come back again and tell you that I didn't add anything new:
> we have here : ruo-ã from *howrwo + ã so we don't have Only 'rwu'

> you show me and talk about it...
> The most closer phonetism that I could found in Romanian for

this

> cluster of 3 vowels is:
> a) 'rouã' (with exactly an 'r' context, only the stressed is
> different)
>
> and others 2 like:
> b) 'nouã' pers. pron. 'we' -> dativ form
> (attested in variants: like 'nuoã' (good example, that shows us
> that '-ouã' and '-uoã' can be interchangeable, isn't it?)

and 'nuaã' -

> see variants of 'Tatal nostru' in Romanian).
>
> c) 'ouã' 'eggs'.
>
> As an example of what you have done here by changing the

context

> of *rwo-ã with *rwu and talking next only about 'rwu':
> is like to talk about the derivation of an 'a' in PAlb in a

word

> where we have 'ai'
>
> So once again you should apply 'Okam rasor' or other similar
> rules (by the way, why you haven't apply "Okam Rasor" regarding
> your "contorsed" chronology?) on a similar context not on a

different

> one....
>
> If you want to talk about 'r-ouã' or 'r-uoã' in Romanian (in

> stressed and unstressed context) please do it, but not talk about
> *rwu in place.
> If you don't like to talk about r-ouã or r-uoã in Romanian
> please don't make any conclusion regarding the outcome of this
> cluster based on other clusters.
>
> If I resume based on the 4 Rules above, the derivation

of 'hora'

> from PAlb *walwo:- PIE wel-7 raised no issue.
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> Alb. s derives from earlier *c^ also in NATIVE words,
> Just as above: *a: > o is a NATIVE change
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> Of course, this is TRUE. But I'm not talked about this.
>
> When you are in difficulty you changed very quickly the context:
> Of course PAlb c^ > Alb s (<-> Rom c^: cioara)
>
> I said ONLY "not in Slavic Times" (In this case c^ > s even for

Latin

> times is difficult to proof it, because we have Lat ci/gi - Alb
> q/gj )
>
> So you fixed the ending of c^>s transformation very late 'in Slavic
> Times' based on a SINGLE example (that has a dubious Slavic origin))
>
> b) PAlb a: > Alb o (<-> Rom a)
> Once again of course is TRUE.
> But not "in Latin times" when Lat a:/a - Alb a.
>
> Once again you put the timeframe of this change very late based on

> SINGLE example that could be very well a Greek loan.
>
> My reserves was about your timeframes and not about the rules.
>
> In both cases a second example for your timeframes above would be
> welcome (as you have requested me in case of a prothetic 'h' in
> Romanian).
> Or you don't apply the same rules on both sides?
>
>
> ------------------------------
> vatra
> -------------------------------
>
> I don't see any reaction regarding the possible timeframe of
> the "prothetic v" in vatra....Rom. "va" - Alb "va" in this case.
>
>
> Only the Best,
> marius
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@...>
> wrote:
> > On 04-11-19 11:44, alexandru_mg3 wrote:
> >
> > > a) see the Slavic c^ > Alb. s -> where you can propose a
> single
> > > Slavic word (a doubtful word regarding its Slavic origin)
> >
> > Alb. s derives from earlier *c^ also in NATIVE words, as any
> historical
> > grammar of Albanian will tell you; cf. pesë < *pêc^ë < *penkWe-.

> can
> > reasonably expect some of the earliest Slavic loans to have

joined

> this
> > relatively recent change. The examples cannot be many for
> historical
> > reasons, but any loanword with *c^ simply takes a free ride --

the

> > change has been independently established for inherited Albanian
> words;
> > I didn't make it up.
> >
> > > b) see also Latin a: > Alb. o -> where you can propose a

single

> > > word too (that could be very well also a Greek loan in

Albanian).

> >
> > Just as above: *a: > o is a NATIVE change and any loanword taken

> a
> > sufficiently early date will undergo it together with the native
> lexical
> > stock. I don't invent any special changes to push my point

through.

> >
> > > So please don't tell me that 'huo'>'uo' is 'ad-hoc' and that

> > > work with singularities.
> > > At least I put you a second example here of a "prothetic h"
> in
> > > Romanian.
> > >
> > > ( I also hoped that 'hou' < 'uo' being obvious (we have here
> > > this 'uo' twice) not to be raised by you as an impossibility.

But

> I'm
> > > wrong ...)
> >
> > It's nice to see you admit it ;-)
> >
> > > ----------------------------------------------------------------

> -
> > > This is directly contradicted by <vatrã>, where Alb. va-/vo- is
> > > retained.
> > > ----------------------------------------------------------------

> -
> > > There is no contraction regarding 'vatra'. The contradiction

> in
> > > your model that supposed that 'wa' -> 'o' and 'wa' -> 'va'
> happened
> > > on 'the same moment of time'.
> > >
> > > Of course that in this case a contradiction will be obtain.
> > >
> > > Is what I said in my previous message that based on this

rule:

> > > PAlb 'wa' > Rom. 'o' your Albanian timeframes (and Proto

Romanian

> too)
> > > will become false.
> > >
> > > And I will come here with more examples regarding the PAlb
> > > *w ,*v , Latin *v, and Proto-Romanian *w , *v.
> > >
> > > Another issue with 'vatra' is: if "v" in vatra "is

prothetic",

> the
> > > situation is even more complicated in order to give this word

> > > example here.
> > >
> > > So you need to review your model by including more facts.
> >
> > Thank you, but I try to respect the facts out of my own accord.
> >
> > > ----------------------------------------------------------------

> --
> > > Whose "reconstruction" is this? *-rw- would have given

Romanian

> <-rb-
> > >
> > >>,
> > >>as in corb < corvu- /korwu-/. Please stop multiplying

absurdities.

> > >
> > > ----------------------------------------------------------------

> --
> > > It's a wrong context in your example:
> > >
> > > a) We don't have rw(u) in hora but a more complicated
> phonetic
> > > context (more vowels) : 'rwo-a'/'rwã-a'/'row-a' (for a similar
> > > vocalism see Rom. 'roua' : Romanian '(r)oua' is the most

closer

> > > example that I can show you regarding this 'uoa'/'oua'/'uãa' in
> hora.)
> >
> > Sorry, but the "complications" are all a figment of your
> imagination. It
> > seems there are no lengths to which you could go to make the
> derivation
> > appear to work. Ockham's Razor applies here.
> >
> > > b) Secondly 'corb' is not considered by some linguists

(like

> > > Academia Romana) as an inherited Latin word in Romanian.
> > > See DEX (http://dexonline.ro/search.php?

cuv=corb&source=)

> >
> > You do well to respect DEX; it's a pity you don't accept the
> etymology
> > of <horã> given there.
> >
> > > made by Academia Romana that clearly indicates:
> > >
> > > "din Lat. corvus" and not "Lat. corvus"
> > >
> > > This 'din Lat.' is the DEX indication that is not a

Latin

> > > inherited word BUT was loaned via other sources or is a later
> Latin
> > > loan (for an inherited Latin word in DEX see : "ÁRMĂ [...]
> Lat. arma"
> >
> > This is getting ridiculous. Since when does "from Latin" (<din
> Lat.>)
> > means that the word cannot be in from Latin (whether borrowed or
> > inherited, as in this case)? Where does the dictionary mention

such

> a
> > convention? But if you have any doubts, take any other word of
> similar
> > form, such as cerb < cervus. Here DEX says simply "Lat." BTW, if
> the
> > 'raven' word were a later loan from Romance or book Latin, not
> > inherited, it would have yielded Rom. <corv> (like <nerv>). <-rb-
>
> gives
> > away its status as an old word.
> >
> > > -------------------------------------------------------------
> > >
> > >>Ever heard about Wanderwörter?
> > >
> > > -------------------------------------------------------------
> > >
> > > Is not the "Wanderwörter" idea that I qualified "contorted"
> > > regarding 'hora' (this could be another topic we didn't even

open

> it)
> > > but the "chronology of loans in Balkans" regarding this word.
> > > So the "the chronology" is the issue...based on the knowing
> facts.
> >
> > I rest my case.
> >
> > Piotr

[tied] Re: Albanian valle 'circular dance' - Proto-Albanian form?