Piotr wrote:
I.
>It is a proposal to be refuted (if possible), not one to be
>demonstrated. As far as I can see there is no evidence of RUKI in
>Albanian. Both *-rs- and *-sr- seem to have given -r- (lengthening
the
>preceding vowel), the cluster *k(^)s either loses one of its members
or
>ends up as /h/ (thus merging with *sk(^)), etc.
My arguments are the following -> it's true they are related to u, i
contexts (sorry that I re-post them):
1. As you case see below in the common words Rom sh - Alb sh appears
only after an u.
Is this a coincidence? Seems more probable to be a rule.
Albanian - Romanian Common Words
Rom. cãpuSã Alb cãpushë
Rom. ghiuj Alb gjysh
Rom. muSkoi Alb. mushk
Rom. guSã Alb. gushë (could be also from Latin)
There is a single words:
moS 'old man, grandfather' ~ Alb. moshë 'age'
where we don't have an u in front of a sh. However a
reconstruction
is very difficult to be made in this case (if the root is ma:t- or
something similar for sure we have a contraction here maybe with a
suffix -usV too)
2. Also important to say in the Albanian - Romanian Common Words
there is no Rom s - Alb sh after an u or i
3. Seems also more plausible that Balto-Slavic, Indo-Iranian and
Thraco-Dacian to go togheter in this direction (->RUKI rule affected
globally the SATEM group)=> The Indo-Iranian (that has the RUKI Rule)
splitted earlier than the split between Balto-Slavic (that has RUKI
Rule) and Thraco-Dacian-Proto-Albanian group.
II.
>How's that different from the following, more parsimonious theory:
the
>prefixes in question contained Proto-Albanian *s, which has yielded
>Modern Albanian <sh> via the normal course of development, just like
>Lat. sk is reflected as <shk>? The combination -s#k- in prefix/root
>sandhi arose too late to produce <h>.
The supposition that you presented: that s- have appeared and
dissapeared need to be demonstrated
not only to be asserted.
At the beginning of the word maybe this could be understandable
(mobile *s-), but the apparition of a s inside the words
to obtain a shk is not a real argument. And we have 'internal'
inherited -shk- too.
A '*s versus *sh' theory to explain PAlb *sk> h and *sk>sk is a more
organic one.
RUKI Rule is a transformation that could be common to all Proto-Satem
group so the existence of sh- will be very well justified.
Of cause remain to detect the correct forms case by case in order to
really prove this..
III.
> This is a completely arbitrary supposition. There's nothing in
these
> forms (as transmitted via Greek) to suggest the pronunciation /s^/
in
> ancient times.
What letter you expect in the Latins and Greeks attested forms to
reflect a PAlb *sh?
Why ss (see Naissos, Ardessos) (or even s) is not a good candidate?
Best Regards,
Marius Alexandru