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

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Abdullah Konushevci
<akonushevci@...> wrote:

> On 6/14/05, elmeras2000 <jer@...> wrote:
> > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, 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.
>
> [AK]
> 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."

Well, did I write that? Then of course it *must* be good. And, come
to think of it again, aí would be structured just like Greek autós,
e.g. acc.sg.masc. atë = autón. And if *au is 'away', as Lat. au-
fero: 'I remove', Slavic u-myti 'wash off', then k- would make good
sense as 'close, at hand, with', which would indeed remind one of
Lat. cum. So yes, I like it again.

>
> > > 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.
>
> [AK]
> Very interesting, but we should presuppose metathetic variant <uj>

of

> <ju>. <uj> yields regularly Alb. <y>.

I suppose you're thinking of the word fryt 'fruit'. It is commonly
interpreted to reflect a development from *frujt because of the old
spelling <fruit>. But that is a spelling from a writing system that
had no letter for /y/ (/ü/). The Latin word is fru:ctus with a
long /u:/ which should give Alb. /y/. If the vowel were short, the -
ct- should have given -ft-; -ct- became -jt- after a front vowel, as
in drejt, but -ft- after a back vowel, as in luftë 'war' (Lat.
lucta 'wrestle'). Therefore the Old Albanian spelling surely stands
for [fryjt] with a front [y], so it's a from with -yj- that has
given fryt.

Jens