> Until now, you are the first one to suspect that Alb <mesë/mbesë>
is
> inherited word. Important is to be the first, isn't it!
I'm not the first, Abdullah: as I know, Pedersen was the
first...seems that you are not well informed here...:)
(seems also that the obssesion with 'the first' and 'the second' is
not on my side...:) )
To come back to the topic:
The idea that is a loan from the Balkan Latin (see Romanian
nepoatã) is more probable but a PIE derivation is not at all
impossible...
> > ----------------
> > gn > nj (njoh < PAlb gna:-ska < PIE *g'neh1?-sko)
> >
> > NOTE: the transformation was only gn > nj (and not also g'n>nj)
> > because the depalatisation of palatal velars in an {n,m,l,r}
context
> > happened long before -> Timeframe: Dialectal IE.
>
>
> And why, and who says that? Maybe your well-known time frame!
First, I 'don't understand well' why you are so nervous...regarding
my 'well-known' timeframes ?
If you don't trust in them please put your timeframes here....or at
least some arguments against them...
Now on the topic:
Is very older because we can find such depalatization in Balto
Slavic too...and not only there...
There were also peoples that have supposed that there was only k^
and g^ in PIE and that k and g appeared Only from this kind of
depalatizations (there were also inverse theories that the k^ g^
appears later only in Dialectal IE from k and g specific contexts
too)...all of them on the idea that 'we' don't need three velar
series in PIE...and I tell you this only to can see 'how old' this
depalatization is considered to be....
So this idea: that the de-palatization of pure velars is a very-old
transformation is really well-known Abdullah, despite the fact that
seems to be new for you...
I'm very suprized also about your expressions like: 'who said that'?
Seems that you need 'an authority' to tell you at any moment what
is 'true or false'...
> ng -- ng
> >
> > kn > nj (similar with gn)
> >
> > NOTE: majë is more probable from mal-ja: (< mal 'mountain,
shore').
>
> I think it isn't. Prove it. Find any other cognate.
Abdullah, -ja: is a suffix and mal is a noun...also lj > j is
regular....These are sufficient arguments to can establish a
derivation mal => *malja > majë
You can find another guy that propagate such 'non-sense' at:
url:
http://www.indoeuropean.nl/cgi-bin/response.cgi?
root=leiden&morpho=0&basename=\data\ie\alb&first=271
and you can consult also Orel's AED (...I understood that you have
that book too)
> nk > ng (nga 'out' < PAlb *en-ka)
>
>
> Yes, it is Orel's etymology, but I think that primary form is
*kah of Gheg
> dialect, until <nga> 'where, from, to' is a prefixed form and it
is derived
> from interrogative and relative stem of pronouns *kWo-.
It could be also like you said...
>> > nt > nd (lend 'acorn' < PAlb *lenta)
>
>
> No, primary form is <len>.
The cognates are in -to please check...
> tn > n (zotnë (Old acusative) > zonë 'lord, master', motnë >
> > monë 'weather, year')
> >
> > nd -- nd
> >
> > dn > n (ënj 'to swell, inflame' < PAlb *aidnja < PIE *Hoid-njo ->
> > Arm. aytnowm 'to swell')
> Alb. <ânj/ënj> are derived from PIE *anH- 'to breath' and probably
this is
> > most funny etymology I ever seen.
Abdullah, this is Demiraj's etymology published on Leiden...and
I 'really don't know' who's reaction was funny in this case....:)
So please take a look on Leiden to 'probably' find out (again) 'the
most funny etymology that you ever seen'...:)
URL:
http://www.indoeuropean.nl/cgi-bin/response.cgi?
root=leiden&morpho=0&basename=\data\ie\alb&first=131
> > NOTE: Abdullah, I prefer this example as a more sure one, due to
> > Armenian cognate, than lej or gjej.
> >
At least the Armenian word aytnowm should have generated more than
a 'funny reaction' ... on your side...
> >
> > VI.
> > ----------------
> > ln > ll (we need to find a good example)
> >
> > NOTE: sjell is not from PAlb c^el-na because the output would
have
> > been *sjall not sjell...So Alb. sjell < PAlb *c^e-la (for the
same
> > reason vjell < *we-la)
>
>
> Please, Piotr or others, defend me from such nonsenses.
....'please Piotr or others' (Legend: 'Piotr or others' = 'the
authorities here') 'is true or not' that 'very probable' PAlb é>je
has appeared in an open syllable, and PAlb é>ja in a closed one?
In this case, sje- and vje- show 'us' an open syllable, Abdullah
(sorry, that I used 'your term' here, usually I would say : 'show
me') ...and next we cannot have -lna in the last syllable in PAlb...
So, I'm afraid that in this case even your supposed authorities
here cannot defend you, Abdullah: because unfortunately 'such
nonsense' are currently the rules...
You can consult also Demiraj 'on-line' to see that there is no *-no
there...:
vjell => Quasi-IE *welH-o
--------------------------
Url:
http://www.indoeuropean.nl/cgi-bin/response.cgi?
root=leiden&morpho=0&basename=\data\ie\alb&first=1&sort=albform&text_
albform=vjell&method_albform=substring
sjell => Quasi IE: kWel-o
--------------------------
Url:
http://www.indoeuropean.nl/cgi-bin/response.cgi?
root=leiden&morpho=0&basename=%5Cdata%5Cie%
5Calb&first=1&sort=albform&text_albform=sjell&method_albform=substrin
g&text_albmeaning=&method_albmeaning=substring&text_paradigm=&method_
paradigm=substring&text_palb=&method_palb=substring&text_qie=&method_
qie=substring&text_albother=&method_albother=substring&text_albsee=&m
ethod_albsee=substring&text_albae=&method_albae=substring&text_ieform
=&method_ieform=substring&text_iemean=&method_iemean=substring&text_i
ecert=&method_iecert=substring&text_pokpage=&method_pokpage=substring
&text_gr=&method_gr=substring&text_lat=&method_lat=substring&text_arm
=&method_arm=substring&text_other=&method_other=substring&text_note=&
method_note=substring&text_any=&method_any=substring
Also, please check further and you will be surprized to find 'such
nonsense' almost everywhere around...
Marius
P.S. I'm sorry for the tone of my reply but your initial answer
was 'a litle bit outside' of the common sense...we have a proverb in
Romanian for such reactions (unfortunately the proverb is not yet on
the web so I cannot indicate for instance its url)