Re: [tied] Re: Alb. 'delirium'

On 7/7/05, alex <alxmoeller@...> wrote:

> alexandru_mg3 wrote:
> > 2) or also to suspect a link with Romanian vb. 'aiurá'
> > 'to rave; to rant; (fig) to talk nonsense'
> > (in fact yourself has detected this possible link in the past)
> >
> > We can have:
> > 2.1 PAlb *ajo:r-ma (sb.) (with the PIE suffix *-mo) > LatePAlb
> > *ajerma > Alb. jerm
> >
> > NOTE-1: a- > zero it's regular, but I'm not sure about aio: > aie: >
> > je
> > 2.2 PAlb *aio:r-á (vb.) > PRom aiorá > Rom. aiurá
> >
> > NOTE-2: with regular non-stressed o > u in Romanian.
> >
> > Of course remains to can identify the PIE root, too.
> >
> > Best Regards,
> > Marius
>
> DEX consider the verb "aiura" as coming from "aiurea" and "aiurea" is
> considered as being from Latin aliubi + re +a, which of course is of
> course very "aiurea" ( nonsense)
>
> It seems to me the "ai-" here is the reflex on an older "*aly-" and
> "-ura" seems to be from "ura"(< *ora, thus "aiura"= "alio-orare" >
> aliorare > a(l)iura(re)>aiura= to speak in foreign/strange/other way
> which appears semantically solid enough. I guess these roots are IE
> "*ali" and "*or".
>
> In the same manner can be explained the word "aiurea" (sich irren):
> *alio+*ore where *ore should show the movement, presumably from IE
> *or/*er as in Latin "orior" or Alb. "jerm" (*er-mo) etc.
> The final "a" can be explained as "due analogy" or one can see here
> maybe the locative/definite article "a" alio-ore-a = this-strange-walk
>
> Alex

************
According to V. Orel, Alb. <jerm> m 'delirium, absent-mindedness' goes
back to PAlb *erma etymologically identical with Lith ermas 'monster',
Lat. erms 'wonder full apparition', ermi 'wonders, miracles'. JOKL
Studien 32; FRANKEL 122; POKORNY I 58; DURIDANOV Trakite 56, 75 (to
Thr *ermas); ÇABEJ St. I 250, VII 205; DEMIRAJ AE 208.

To my view, problem is that Alb. <jerm> didn't exists independently,
but only in verbal phrase (VP) <flet në jerm> 'to speak in delirium',
synonymic with <flet pëçartë> 'to speak in disorder', which, for me,
is a metaphorical expression for <speach, oratio, sermo>, that was and
still is, for common vulgus, irrational. Other derivatives, like
'li•gjër•oj> 'to speak', <n•gjër•oj> 'to insert, taste' just prove my
suspicion that they are all derivatives from PIE *ser- 'to line up',
but Hett <sarra> 'brechen, teilen'.
I am grateful to your responds, even I wait to have some feedback from
Mr. Jens and Piotr, especially about *s > j.

Konushevci