Re: [tied] PIE *y > Alb. /z/ (was Re: Romanian Verb )

From: Abdullah Konushevci
Message: 38628
Date: 2005-06-14

On 6/14/05, elmeras2000 <jer@...> wrote:
> --- In, Abdullah Konushevci
> <akonushevci@...> wrote:
> > But, really I want to know do you found plausible my explanation that
> > Alb. demonstratives <ajo> from *H2eu- + saH2 > *au- + *sa:, as well
> as
> > <ai> from *au- + *so.
> I don't know what the a- is; nor do I know what the kë- of ky këtë kjo
> is.

In message No 26271 I have wrote that first part of Albanian
demonstratives pronouns < ajo> 'she' and <aj> 'he' was derived from
*au- (Pokorny *au-3 'herab, weg von', pp. 72) that regulary have
yielded Alb. /a/ and first part of <ky> 'this' and <k(ë)jo> from PIE
*ko(m)- (Pokorny *kom Adverb (Prefix and preposition or postposition)
'neben, bei, mit', pp. 612-613), making binary opposition.
And, your answer was: "I like Abdullah's interpretation of the first
parts of k-y and a-í as
local adverbs 'to' and 'from' which connects them with well-known prepositions."

> > And, at last, what do you think do we have in
> > Alb. possessive pronoun <ynë> is derived from *we- 'we' + enclitic
> > *nos, attested in <jonë>.
> It should be *so-nos, but I am not too comfortable with the form y-. I
> have once guessed at identity with Avestan huuo: 'he'. That form is
> now commonly considered to be a phonetic development from Iranian
> *hau, but I am not sure that is correct. If there was a *suos, the
> Albanian reflex could well be y.

Very interesting, but we should presuppose metathetic variant <uj> of
<ju>. <uj> yields regularly Alb. <y>.

> > The distinction between Pedersen's etymology
> > and mine is just this /s/, that, according to him, became zero, and,
> > to my view, <j>, probably through intermediary stage <gj>.
> That is exactly what I have suggested. Pedersen saw the j- as a hiatus
> filler arisen i sandhi. He said the same for ju 'you', but since *s-
> and *y- both yield gj- it looks more like a further reduction of that.
> Jens