--- In
cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Piotr Gasiorowski" <gpiotr@...>
wrote:
>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, Miguel Carrasquer <mcv@> wrote:
>
> > Are there any traces whatsoever of Winter's law in Albanian?
> > The other day I discovered a major error in my thinking
> > about the Balto-Slavic merger of /a/ and /o/, which I had
> > assumed to be Proto-Balto-Slavic or even pre-Balto-Slavic,
> > possibly Proto-Balto-Slavo-Albano-Indo-Irano-Germanic :-)
>
> Isn't it trivial enough to be disqualified as evidence of
relatedness?
> There might be something areal about the unrounding of *o, but it
> carries no phylogenetic signal (cf. the fate of <lot> in American
> English; words loke <cause> and <song> are catching up right
now).
To consider such a global rule like o>a 'an independent one' would
be a mistake. Why to disqualified something if 'is trivial enough'
(I'm not aware about such criteria :))
More logical is to consider the existence of a 'common Proto-Balto-
Slavo-Albano(Daco-Thracian)-Indo-Irano-Germanic' phylogenetic areal
where a>o happened.
I.
So I think that the first split (excluding Anatolian one) of IE
languages should be detected based on the "o>a split".
This will put the Greeks and the Celto-Italics on ONE SIDE (the
split of Anatolians happened even earlier) and all the others Proto-
Balto-Slavo-Albano(Daco-Thracian)-Indo-Irano-Germanic on another
side....
This will lead us also to the conclusion that the Greek and Italo-
Celtic Migrations started earlier and 'all the others' 'have
remained in place for a while' (this is also in accordance with
today Greeks , Italic and Celtic 'exo-centric' positions)
II.
NEXT, on the remaining IE main group "Proto-Balto-Slavo-Albano(Daco-
Thracian)-Indo-Irano-Germanic" the Germanic group moved first in a N-
W and W direction
III.
NEXT, the Indo-Arian group move later to another direction (E and
next S-E)
IV.
FINALLY, the remaining 'central' group "Proto-Balto-Slavo-Albano
(Daco-Thracian)" split in the Balkanic One <<Albano(Daco-Thracian)
>> and in an N , N-E "Proto-Balto-Slavic" block
This will place also 'the original center' more to the WEST (like
<<middle and low Danube's area>>) than the current NORD-PONTIC
Assumption
> > However, Winter's law gives /ad/ > /a:d/ but /od/ > /o:d/
> > (with some cases of /a:d/ as well), which implies that /a/
> > and /o/ were still distinct when the law started to work.
> >
> > This can mean either that the merger of /a/ and /o/ is
> > younger than I thought, or, less likely, that Winter's law
> > is older than I thought, hence my question above.
>
> I'm not aware of anything that might be interpreted as a trace of
> Winter's Law in Albanian, but then I haven't really looked for such
> things, and I doubt if anyone has. I'll think about possible
evidence
> -- or counterevidence.
>
> Piotr
>
In Albanian we have a global issue 'to well derive the vocalism'
from PIE.
1. Sometimes the o-grades 'are proposed' in place of zero-grades or
full-grades only 'to can well derive the form' from PIE
2. The diphtongs having long vowels (like a:u > a: ; a:i > a:) are
considered to be reduced only to the long vowel (before the long
vowels transition to short vowels happened)
3. the situation of rh, lh clusters is not clear enough (even the
best rules that 'I could found' are : rh1 > ar ; rh3>ar ; rh2>ru)
4. is not sure if h1,h2,h3 are lost or not in all the positions
So in the above 'context' to can check the application of the
Winter's Law in Albanian will be almost impossible
Marius