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

From: alex
Message: 38655
Date: 2005-06-15

elmeras2000 wrote:
>
> Well, did I write that? Then of course it *must* be good. And, come
> to think of it again, a� would be structured just like Greek aut�s,
> e.g. acc.sg.masc. at� = aut�n. 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 what does one with the reflexive pronoun in Alb. which is "vetja"?
Of course on this reason (au >a), this cannot be related anymore to
Greek "auto". But IE au > Alb. "ve" as we seen in many words, so one of
the derivations is wrong. Presumabely the one about demonstrative
pronouns is the wrong one.


Alex




--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.7.2/14 - Release Date: 14.06.2005