*dus > dysh- ( was Re: [tied] Latin du:rus)

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "altamix" <alxmoeller@...> wrote:

>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Abdullah Konushevci"
> <akonushevci@> wrote:
> >
> > --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "altamix" <alxmoeller@> wrote:
> > > Apparently the Gk. is the source for this "hostile" subject

and

> > > not turkish. I wonder id the phonetic change is Albanian or

not.

> > >
> > > Alex
> > ************
> > No, the Persian is a source, because Persian form was <dush-
> > men> 'enemy, hostile' that yields Turkish <dyshman>

(düshman) 'id.'

> > that has as result Romanian, Serbian, Albanian <dushman>. And,

as

> > you know, Greek is much closer to Persian then to Latin.
> > Nevertheless, it may be possible the Greek form to be the

source,

> > because of s > sh evolution and as well -men > -mân (cf. place

name

> > Dushman that, to my view, has nothing to do with Turkish
> > <düshman>). In Albanian you have the verb <me dush> 'to kiss'
> > probably from a same source of the verb <me dashtë> 'to love'

that

> > will avoid the homonymy with <düshman>.
> >
> > Konushevci
> >
>
> This is why I mentioned has having an "albanoid" development "s
> > "sh", the "u" <"y", "e" > "a" etc.
> In Rum. the word is _new_ for sure. new= the phonetic aspect is

the

> same as this of the Slavic loans, that is , the word cannot be

older

> as the VI century. the plain "a" speaks for it.

The Albanian form is dushman with the stress on the last syllable.