Re: [tied] Alb. djathtë -- Where does the come from? (the sol

alexandru_mg3 wrote:

>>From here Piotr please revise it, doesn't sound very good:
> a) the exsitance of w in djathë is a pure supposition

No, it isn't. If you reject the extra consonant, the <ja> is
inexplicable (before a single Proto-Albanian consonant we'd get <je>).
Then, if not *dek^s(i)wo-, then what? *dek^s(i)no- and *dek^s(i)tero-
can be ruled out for Albanian. I'd argue that the extra-Albanian
evidence _forces_ us to assume a *w in the preform.

> b) you cannot linked djathë with gjashtë where we have k'st
> c) *sw > *zw > *Dv > Mod.Alb. d. is unprobable despite djell
> (I will come back here -> in djell we have a protethic d,dh < *dz)

What on earth is "prothetic d"? And what about <dergjem>, does it show a
prothetic /d/ too?

> d) *sw > *Tv > T is impossible.

Why should it be impossible? Because you think so? Actually, I have
expected to find it somewhere in Albanian. I even wrote this prediction
down in "Albanian (3)". A prediction that turns out to be true should be
considered a strong argument also in favour of *sw > d.

> The ad-hoc trick is a simple rule Piotr : k^s > c > th
>
> Also k^ gave regulary th but you supposed that in djathë < *dek^s was
> simple lost!!!!
>
> In place of the regular k^ > th you have invented for th:
> sw > Tv > th ??? With No Other example..........
>
> And in addition it's you that talked about ad-hoc tricks regarding:
> k^s > c > th.
>
> I cannot understand what you try "to save" here, with all these
> workarounds?

I'm not trying to save anything. I just wanted to understand the
historical development of <djathtë>. Now I can say I understand it,
since I have arrived at an elegant solution that ties up well with other
Albanian sound changes and contains no questionable steps. I just rest
my case.

Piotr