Hello Piotr,
-------------------------------------------------------------------
> There is no such thing as "initial *a:" in PIE. This particular
> pre-Albanian *a:- (> *o- > va-/vo) derives from PIE *h2ah1- in
> *h2ah1-tr-; the a-colouring is from the root-initial *h2, and the
length
> from the root-final *h1. The combination is so rare that one can
> scarcely hope to find another example in Albanian, but,
fortunately,
> early *o- of ANY origin became Tosk va-, even in loans such as Tosk
> varfër, Geg vorfën 'poor' <-- orphanu-, or Tosk vaj, Geg voj 'oil'
<--
-------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm sorry to say but an early *o- not of ANY origin (because we
don't have Albanian Inherited words as Examples with exception of the
supposed 'vatra') but of Greek or Latin origin became Alb vo~va.
An EXTERNAL sound (like 'o' in this case ) of one language (like
Latin or Greek) cannot be taken as it is, to determine based on it an
INTERNAL rule in another language.
Is like to say that if the output of a Dacian ts /c/ is the
Latin 'ss' (based on some inscriptions) from here we have in Latin
the Rule: ts > ss.
Or to take the Romanian ã /&/ and viewing that it gives sometimes
in Bulgarian 'o' to make the Bulgarian rule: ã>o
Any vocalism should be explained first only by the internal rules
of that language. The loans participate to indicate some hints and to
validate the loans but not to establish the rule.
So the argument that the 'o' of some external language(s)
gives 'va'~'vo' in Albanian in a historical period of time is a
valid one but is not sufficient to say that : *o- > va-~vo- in Alb.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
derives from PIE *h2ah1- in
> *h2ah1-tr-; the a-colouring is from the root-initial *h2, and the
length
> from the root-final *h1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
The single path to follow is to arrive to make an internal
derivation in that Language.
If you propose h2ah1 you have to indicates what are the outputs of
h2ah1 in PAlb and how these outputs gives OldAlb *vae~voe and next
Albanian va~vo.
A single supposed root for this *h2ah1 is not sufficient.
Also the OldAlb *vae~voe > Alb va~vo seems complicated enough to be
explained only by a single short 'o' and to imply such dialectal
variations.
I wonder why not to start with the common Albanian Rules like:
PAlb *w > Alb v and to see next from where this vae~voe > va~vo
could arrive in place to suppose *o > va~vo based on the 'o' of some
loans (this external initial 'o' could easy be adapted by PAlb in
different ways like 'wo'/'wa'/'wao'/'wae' based on the existed
internal vocalism that should be fixed first).
You have to include in this equation the fact that Romanian 'vatra'
could very well had something similar with an 'e:'/'E' in its root
(as Alex proposed) and not an 'a' (like an 'ae' 'a:e')
Why? Because in Romanian:
sg. 'vatra' 'hearth,fireplace' / pl. 'vetre' is like :
------------------------------------------------------
sg.'fata' 'girl' / pl.'fete' < Lat. fe:ta < fe:tus
sg.'mãr' 'apple'/pl. 'mere' < Lat. variant 'me:lum'
(see 'me:lum' at Rosetti,Densusianu) and not 'ma:lum' because
accented Lat. a:/a always gives 'a' in Romanian but never 'ã')
Note: I will come back with this second example in another message
because based on Lat. ma:lum you establish once (Lat. a: > PAlb o
see Alb. mollë and implicitly the timeframe of Alb a: > o ) that is
not true in my opinion because based on Rom. 'mãr' the form 'me:lum'
and not 'ma:lum' circulated in Balkan Romance.
sg. 'panã' 'feather' / pl. 'pene' < Lat. 'pinna'
sg. 'parã' 'pear' / pl. 'pere' < Lat. 'pira'
sg. 'masã' 'table' / pl. 'mese' < Lat 'me:nsa'
As you can see there is no 'a' but 'E' in the original source of all
these words.
In addition :
---------------
Rom. raTa /ratsa/ 'duck' - pl. raTe /ratse/ -> Alb. rosë 'id'
doesn't show any alternance a/e in the root between sg. and pl. forms
in Romanian as 'vatra'(pl. vetre) shows.
And we have an original PAlb *a: in Rom 'raTa' viewing Alb. o
(in 'rosë')
So for sure that 'vatra' should have something different in its
original root than a simple PAlb. *a:
Only the Best,
marius
--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@...>
wrote:
> On 04-11-21 21:46, altamix wrote:
>
> >
> > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Abdullah Konushevci"
> >
> >>PIE root *a:ter- 'fire' > Albanian Geg <votër>, Tosk <vatër> is
> >>regular outcome, for PIE /*a:/ yields in Albanian /o/.
> >
> >
> > it is right "a:" > "o"; that does not explain the "va-". There is
no
> > other word -so far I know- which shows an initial "va-" in
Albanian
> > and which derive from an IE root with an initial "a:"
>
> There is no such thing as "initial *a:" in PIE. This particular
> pre-Albanian *a:- (> *o- > va-/vo) derives from PIE *h2ah1- in
> *h2ah1-tr-; the a-colouring is from the root-initial *h2, and the
length
> from the root-final *h1. The combination is so rare that one can
> scarcely hope to find another example in Albanian, but,
fortunately,
> early *o- of ANY origin became Tosk va-, even in loans such as Tosk
> varfër, Geg vorfën 'poor' <-- orphanu-, or Tosk vaj, Geg voj 'oil'
<--
> oleu-. So the <va-> is fully explained.
>
> Piotr