--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Abdullah Konushevci"
<akonushevci@...> wrote:
> > > Alb. [] /*s/ > /j/.
> > > I remember that it was first mentiond this etymology by Mr.
> Rasmusen.
[Piotr:]
> > Was it? I would still find it unacceptable. Neither *j > Alb. z
> nor *-s-
> > > Alb. -j- are independently established and generally recognised
> sound
> > changes, so you can't assume they are "regular" if that's
> precisely what
> > you set out to prove.
I have NOT proposed a regular sound law "s > j" for Albanian. I have
however, proposed an event of lenition of the expected product of *s-,
viz. gj-, to Alb. j-. A good example is jo-në 'our' (fem.) from *sa: +
enclit. *nos. Since IE *y- also gives Alb. gj-, I would assume that
ju 'you' (pl.) is also a reduced form. And the verb to be certainly
also qualifies, so janë 'they are' could be a reduced form of
(expected) *gjanë from *senti or *sonti.
As for kam ... kanë 'have', I am inclined to consider this a
juxtaposition with 'am, are' as the second part. The first part would
be identical with the form ka(:) which is used without a following
copula as the 3sg. It would mean something like 'owner', but I can't
spell out the particulars any closer than that.
Jens