Alb. *wikY+ (was: Latin sync., ik(o))

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

> For Alb -zet 'twenty'; Arm mrjiwn, gen. mrjman 'ant' a
> simplified description would go:
>
>
> *morma:x mormik+ > L formi:ca; Arm mrjiwn, gen. mrjman
>
> *widkYm,ti > Skt viMs'ati; Alb -zet
>
>
> mormiko:n .. mormikn,+ .. widkYm,ti
> mormiko:n .. mormikn,+ .. wikYm,ti
> mormikHo:n . mormikHn,+ . wikYm,ti
> mormkYHo:n . mormkYHn,+ . wYkYm,ti
> mormgYHo:n . mormgYHn,+ . wYgYm,ti
> mormgYHo:n . mormgYHn,+ . wYgYm,ti
> morgYHmo:n . morgYHmn,+ . gYwYm,ti
> morgYHyo:n . morgYHmn,+ . gYwYm,ti
> morj^Hyo:n . morj^Hmn,+ . j^wYm,ti
>
> etc.
>
>
> d>0 / V_C-dental (Alb)
>
> stop-voice > +aspirated (Arm)
>
> i>Y / $C_$C etc.
>
> C>+voice / $C+voice_ etc.
>
> met. of G/C+sonor C-sonor / $_
>
> m>y / $gYh_ (Arm)
>
> KY > C^

With the above in mind a variation on derivations like that below is
also possible:


--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "Piotr Gasiorowski"
<piotr.gasiorowski@...> wrote:

> Furthermore, one can't accept any etymology that doesn't deal with
> <zot> and <zonjë> together and fails to explain their "lord and lady"
> semantics. The following etymologies fare much better:
>
> *wik^á:-pot- > *dz^a:(p)t- > zot
> *wik^á:-potn(i)ja: > *dz^a:(pt)nja: > zonjë
>
> *w(i)k^- > *dzw- > *dz^- > z- as in *wik^m.tih1 > *dz^ati- > -zet '20'.
> Strange but true.
>
> Piotr

I think an analogical thematic feminine is unlikely, and it would
almost certainly not be occurring as the compound form. The loss of o
isn't adequately explained. Keeping close to attested forms:

wikYpotn,+
wYkYpotn,+
wYgYbotn,+
gYwYbotn,+
gYwYobotn,+
j^wobotn,+
z^wobotn,+
zwobotn,+
zwabatn,+
zwabata+
zwa_ata+
zwa:ta+

etc.


This fits in with my earlier rules and known Alb. changes with the
following addition: 0>V / CG_CV


d>0 / V_C-dental (Alb)

stop-voice > +aspirated (Arm)

i>Y / $C_$C etc.

C>+voice / $C+voice_ etc. (repeats)

met. of G/C+sonor C-sonor / $_

0>V / CG_CV

m>y / gYh_*n (Arm)

KY > C^

affricate > fric.

z^ > z / _w