--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Piotr Gasiorowski <gpiotr@...>
wrote:
> The verb root is *bHreh1g^-, as in Ved. bHra:jate and Av. bra:zaiti
> 'shine, beam'. The Balto-Slavic cognates (from *bHreh1g^-(sk^e-
> ) 'to dawn') show *e:, demonstrating that the laryngeal was *h1.
> The 'birch' word is a vr.ddhi derivative with the secondary e-
> grade inserted in the "wrong" interconsonantal slot, as quite
> often happens in this kind of formation. The original pattern was
> most likely *bHérh1g^-o-s, coll. *bHr.h1g^-áh2, levelled out with
> various results. The Albanian adjective seems to go back to
> *bHr.h1g^-ó- (perhaps from dissimilated > *bHr.h1g^-ró-).
>
>
> Piotr
if the root wherefrom the Alb."bardhë" developed should have been
*bhérh1g^- I have heavy problems to connect the Rom. "barzã" with.
The only explanation -phoneticaly speaking- should be that the Rum.
got the word direct from its actually Alb. form. A such explanation
will contradicte mostly all we know about the common words of these
two languages since the words which are in Rum. show usualy an older
phonetic aspect as Alb. counteparts. The different semantism of the
word will bold more the differences here, despite the acceptance they
should be the reflexes of the same word. Yet, the theoretical
posibility is stil there.
From the root you mean here I expect in Rum. a "*breaz-" and the word
exists as such. This is an adjectiv but it is considered to be a loan
from Bulgarian "breaz".
Alex