> *****GK: Maybe, maybe not. If Albanian descends from
> Dacian, there is no way of conclusively proving
> anything about the location and reasons for r->l. And
> judging by Piotr's suggested reconstruction of
> "Paralatae" (which I like very much (:=)) it seems
> clear that the Iranic Scythians were not an
> l-exclusive ethnos either.*****
George, I'm very confused about your position "maybe maybe not
etc...". Please be more clear...
I. a) Any of the Scythian tribes (let's talk here about Herodotus
attestation so I don't talk about Sarmatians) didn't show r->l?
I. b) Some of the Scythian tribes show r->l, others not ?
I. c) All the Scythian tribes shows the l-preservation ? (I hope that
you will not sustain this)
II.a. II.b II.c. Same set of questions for Sarmatian tribes....
If at least one of I.b or I.c. or II.b or II.c is true => what I have
said that "The Proto-Romanian V-l-V>r was trigerred by an Iranic
influence" cannot be rejected based on your arguments....
So please be more clear to can better understand your assertions....
(In order that Abdullah, will not arrive again to say that "I'm the
first that said this", as I know Bonfante was the first suggesting
this influence)
Now my opinion:
a) the "r>l" transformation was a Global Common Indo-Arian
transformation (see also Lubotsky as 'somebody else' that consider
this transformation a Common Indo-Iranian one) that was later
retracted in some Indo-Arian languages/dialects (and usually only in
some particular phonetic contexts)
b) Reagrding an "r from an ancient l" at Scythians/Sarmatians tribes
is 'obvious' See below:
PIE *h1elu-so- 'white'
Attested Scythian tribe: "Aorsoi, Alanaorsoi" (Ptol., Strabo)
the 'White Alans'
Ossetic: urs / ors `white'
Avestan: LAv. auru~sa- `white'
Middle Persian: arus `white'
Sanskrit: arus.á
Based on the above attested form 'Alanaorsoi': I also doubt that the
name Alans comes from Aryans...because based on the above attested
form this seems for me a 'folk etymology' (in this case the name:
Alans is either an 'external name' not gave by them (why not "the
strangers, the barbarians" based *h2el-(e)no 'other, alien' or it was
formed after the Common Indo-Iranian l>r ended)
Marius
P.S.-1:
Even if the Proto-Albanians were a Daco-Moesian tribe (and I think
that they were (see below some '100% sure' Dacian words present today
in Albanian and especially words that folows all the necessary
phonetic rules from PAlb until today Albanian):
A. Dacian Germisara 'hot springs' < Alb. zjarm 'fire' (see gWh/+ >
g^/+ > s in Albanian and PAlb é > Alb ja,je too)
B. Dacian manteia 'blackberry' < Alb. man~mënd 'mulberry' (with
regular final -ntV > -n(V) in Albanian)
C. Dacian Carpathes [mountains], Carpis [tribe] < Alb. karpë 'rock'
D. Dacian *tsika /cika/ 'kind of short,curved sword (attested in Latin
as Latin sicca 'Dacian sword' < Alb. thikë 'knife' (with the regular
k^ > ts /c/ > s in Albanian)
E. Dacia Maluensis 'mountain zone, rocky shore zone' < Alb
mal 'mountain' (with the regular lw > ll or V-l-V > ll in Albanian)
So even if the Proto-Albanians were a Daco-Moesian tribe (and I think
that they were) they were already more or less in the same position
where they are today around 300 BCE => because the Greeks loans in
Albanian are older (see Doric Greek a: > today Alb o) than the Latin
loans in Albanian (see Latin a: > Alb a)...Of course, you can ignore
this and you can continue to think what you want... but ignoring a
Fact will not lead you to any right conclusion....
So my supposition : that an Iranic influence for the Proto-Romanian V-
l-V>r transformation should be placed in Dacia or in Nothern Balkans
is normal:
1. this transformation is not present in PAlb (or it didn't arrive to
a bigger influenced see: Alb V-l-V > V-ll-V); so it cannot
be "linked" to the others Romanian Substratum main rules (almost the
same rule as in PAlb)
2. The PAlbanians were already placed in the South-Western part of
Balkans around 300 BCE - 200 CE (see the Doric Greek loans in Albanian
older than Latin Loans)
3. The Iranic invasions (based on the historical facts) took place
mainly in Dacia and Northern part of the Balkans (see my previous
postings)
4. Among all the IE-languages the r>l transformation took place only
at Indo-Iranians. Next thisntransformation appears at Pre/Proto-
Romanians (in intervocalic positions) during attested historical
contacts with Iranian-tribes in Dacia (see again my postings).
P.S.-2:
I also hope that you didn't think that the Scythians and the
Sarmatians were Pre/Proto-Slavs :)