Re: Hamp on Alb.

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "alexandru_mg3" <alexandru_mg3@...>
wrote:

>
>
> Abdullah the problem of peshk is Mainly e (as in Romanian peSte)

not

> shk (as Piotr supposed here)
>
> the IE *peik'sk- > PAlb piksk-a > would give Alb pishk not peshk
>

[AK] For i >e before cluster -sk- see Greek episkopos, Latin
episcopus that yields in Gheg, mostly catholics, ipeshkv 'bishop'
and Tosk peshkop, mostly orthodoxes.

>
> > The reaction of the representative of the Slavic school, V. Orel
> > (AED 316-317; see also M. Kapovich and Gasiorowski in this

forum)

> > is: (…) HAMP KZ LXXVII 256-257 (peshk as an indigenous form!).

To

> my
> > view, all this have to do more with politics than with
> linguistics,
> > for, according to Slavic linguists, Albanian, being non-

descendent

> > of Illyrian and coming later in this area, borrowed word
> for "fish"
> > from Latin,
>
> Even peshk is from Latin, for sure there was no Slavs in Balkans

at

> that 'loaning' moment...so the Albanians was in Balkans at least

300

> to 600 years before the first Slav arrive there...only based on a
> supposed Latin peshk
> (but and I can demonstrate that they was there even before the

Roman

> Arrival in Balkans)
>
> So I don't see any link between 'Alb peshk as from Latin' and
> the 'Slavic Politic'...

[AK]
According to scholars that deny Albanian autochthony is dominant
view that people that have loaned word <peshk> can't be in any way
descendent of Illyrians or autochtonous in their today territory.

>
> Marius
>