alex wrote:
> I still connect Alb. "dorë" with Rom. "ghearã"; the "sr" cluster
> shouldn't be any trouble since it got reduced to "r"; then the "d" in
> Albanian won't speak for a satem shift but a later one.
??? What later shift? Any examples thereof, or is it just an ad hoc
application of wishful thinking? And why should the consonant
independently reconstructed as *g^H have been preserved as a velar in
Albanian? As I proposed here a while ago (and I am pretty sure by now
that the proposal was correct), PIE *-sr-/*-rs- yield Alb. -r- plus
compensatory lengthening of the preceding vowel. The development of
*g^Hesr- > *3e:r- > dor- is therefore entirely regular and I see no
reason to abandon or modify this reconstruction.
> the "dhâmb" .. are you sure it derives from g^ombHos? I think here more
> at "g^embHos".
There is no such thing as PIE *g^embHos. Gk. gompHos, Germanic *kambaz,
Slavic *zo~bU, Lith. z^ambas and Toch. A kam, B keme unequivocally
require the reconstruction *g^ómbH-o-. Skt. jambHa- is consistent with
it, and so are Alb. dhëmb, dhâmb as the regular reflexes of PAlb. *3a~b-
< *g^ombHos.
> Which are other IE cognates for *k^onid?
The closest match for the Albanian word is Gk. koníd- (konís, konídos),
also with a vowel between the *k^ and the *n. A less direct
correspondence is visible e.g. in Germanic *xnito < *knidah2 (OE hnitu >
nit, OHG (h)niz > Nisse).
Piotr