Talk:Albanian language

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Archive

Peer review Albanian language has had a peer review by Wikipedia editors which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

Contents

[edit] Kwami's input II

Hey again - Another two cents.

  • "1.1 How Albanian compares with other languages"
This isn't quite what I meant. It's a collection of vocabulary, but the words aren't all cognates. What I was thinking (and it should probably go later in the article, say in the vocabulary section) will take a bit more research. For other branches of Indo-European, there are specific articles for the branch (Germanic languages, Slavic languages, etc.) which ideally would summarize how the branch developed from proto-Indo-European and maybe how it relates to other branches. But for the Albanian branch, there's just Albanian (maybe that could be your next project - people would appreciate it!). What I thought would be useful would be a list of cognates showing how Albanian relates to other IE languages. *gw → /g, z/, etc. Well, most of the details belong in the Indo-European article, which currently has nothing on Albanian, but it would be interesting to have a few of the quirks here too. Even just a list of indigenous Albanian numerals and pronouns, showing their similarities but also divergences from other IE languages, would be interesting. Or maybe some examples of how Albanian can look quite different from Greek, even when the words are related.
  • Is the only diff in the phoneme inventories of Gheg and Tosk that Gheg has a set of nasal vowels? Are all the vowels found nasalized? Also not clear from the text or the table if final schwa reduction is a feature of Tosk, or of Gheg compared to Tosk.
  • Case: I refer you to Balkan genitive-dative merger. Albanian does not have a genitive case, and it should be removed from the table. Perhaps you could have a note, instead of a genitive case, Albanian uses with dative with the preposition X or something. The constructions aren't identical in Albanian, unlike Bulgarian, but case is an inflection of the noun, and Albanian doesn't inflect its nouns specially for a genitive. Or you could leave just the dative row, but label it "genitive/dative", and in a note say for the genitive, the preposition X is used.
  • Don't know what you mean by 6 "types" of mood. Should it be 6 moods?
  • The word for a negative imperative is 'prohibitive': "In prohibitive clauses [or "negative commands", if you prefer], the particle mos is used".
  • The English pronunciation equivalents are confusing, especially with their odd mixture of capital and lower case letters. I find them illegible. If you want a spelling pronunciation, I have one at Asteroid pronunciation key that's worked pretty well and which you might use. Or you could simply remove this and stick with the IPA and sound files, which should be enough for anyone.
Cheers, kwami 00:58, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] copy vio and possible pov?

First of all the phrase "and by smaller numbers of ethnic Albanians in other parts of the southern Balkans, along the east coast of Italy and in Sicily, in southern Greece, and in Germany, Sweden, the United States, Ukraine, and Belgium." is copy paste from Britanica, that means using it is a possible copyright violation.

Apart from that I think that the previous phrasing (see here) is more NPOV. +MATIA ☎ 10:43, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Could you tell us what's POV about the Britannica quote? kwami 11:33, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Arvanites are not ethnic Albanians is a good start... Can you notice any other differences between the two versions? +MATIA ☎ 11:37, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

This article is not about the Arvanites or their language. We are talking about the (officially inexistant) Çam Muslim and Orthodox communities. I'm sure that that's what Britannica is talking about and I don't think that Britannica is POV (imagine that). I also highly doubt that it is a possible copyright violation as it is a phrase. If you like, I can ask the Help Desk to check it. Rex(talk) 12:24, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

REX we've been through all these before. The Chams were about 40.000 and they left (let's not get into the reasons now), during the 2nd world war. And the majority of the Cham people were muslims, like the majority of Tosks were christians. All these people are reffered by scholars (for example the editors of Britanica) as Albanians. The majority of "Albanians" (sic) in Greece are not the Chams nor the Albanian workers (since 1992) but the Arvanites. They spoke Arvanitika which some scholars call Albanian, etc. With your search on Albanian language, you 'll see various things that perhaps I've already read, and I think that you'll agree with me. Please give a shot, trying to understand my explanation.

As for Britannica if we could copy-paste it, it would be interesting, but I'm afraid we can't. Read Talk:1911 Encyclopædia Britannica and Wikipedia:1911 Encyclopaedia Britannica. Both the 1911 and the current Britannica are excellent encyclopedias but a) we can't copy-paste from the new one because of copyright (we can't even use the name Britannica for citing the 1911) and b) read WP:PD about bias - I'm not making it up, I'm trying to help you and to discuss that change. +MATIA ☎ 12:42, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

What about the 30,000 Shqiptarë, don't they exist? Honestly, are you saying that Britannica has published a gross inaccurracy? I simply fail to see why you are trying to cover up the fact that there are ethnic Albanians in Greece. What about the 600,000 Albanian immigrants, they even outnumber the Arvanites! If you object to quoting Britannica, why didn't you object to the following, which has been there for months and was removed by me diff:Languages sharing a common origin with Tosk are spoken in Italian and Greek enclaves and appear to be related most closely to the dialect of Çamëria in the extreme south of Albania. That is a blatant copypaste of Britannica which under POV processing resulted in that. Or does copypasting individual sentences amount to copyright violation only in selective cases? As far as I know it isn't (5% is allowed). The only think we can do is to ask if it is. Perhaps quoting Ethnologue's figures is a copyvio. Rex(talk) 13:20, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

I'm not trying to cover up anything. I've wrote about the ethnic Albanians who came to work in Greece (check my text for the word 1992). Verify with a wikipedia expert what I wrote if you don't believe what I write, or if you can't understand the links I gave you before. PS Ethnologue allows to be cited as a refference and they are linguists. +MATIA ☎ 13:27, 9 November 2005 (UTC)


Can I please point out that I myself am Arvanite, or in our own language, Arberesh! We are very much Albanian, but of pre=Ottoman heritage and therefore do not call ourselves Shqiptars. Many Arvanitika people fail to call themselves Albanians because of the association with Shqiptars, which we are not. I find it odd that anyone could say that we don't exist, someobody forgot to tell me I was dead!

[edit] Albanian phonetics

I'll repeat a question I posed a few months back, in the hope that somebody has an answer. In the audio examples provided, Albanian r definitely sounds like an English alveolar approximant (ɹ), not a Spanish alveolar flap (ɾ) as claimed in the article. Can anyone confirm this? No audio is provided for rr to establish whether it is in fact an alveolar trill (r). Also, gj and q are given as the voiced (ɟ) and voiceless palatal plosive (c) respectively, even though they sound more like the postalveolar affricates dʒ and tʃ rather than true palatal plosives.--Theathenae 13:46, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Well, Omniglot seems to indicate that everything is as they are on the article now. I am more concerned about the tables on Greek language. Are there voiced (ɟ) and voiceless palatal plosives (c) in Greek? If so, can you provide us with some kind of source? I can't find anything. Rex(talk) 13:59, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
To my ears, the audio samples in the relevant articles for c and ɟ are the second consonants in κακιά and μαγκιά, which would mean that Greek does indeed have true palatal plosives. In the case of Albanian it would appear that the symbols are instead being used for postalveolar affricates, perhaps to distinguish q and gj from ç and xh. Do q and ç, and gj and xh, really sound different? The audio samples for shqip and tungjatjeta in this article definitely sound much more like [ʃtʃip] and [tun dʒat jɛ ta].--Theathenae 14:15, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
I just checked your Omniglot reference and in fact both ç and q are assigned the IPA symbol for the tʃ, as I correctly suspected. However, it assigns ɟ to gj and dʒ to xh. Now that is intriguing! :)--Theathenae 14:21, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Isn't that original research? κακιά and μαγκιά sound like /kakja/ and /magja/ to me. Also, I was in Cyprus the other day and it sounded quite different (wanna know how)? I'll require a definete source for the presence of those sounds in Greek, or I'll change due to lack of sources. Omniglot denies the existence of those phonemes Rex(talk) 15:55, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

No, /kakja/ and /magja/ is how foreigners like you would pronounce those words in Greece. The Greeks pronounce them with a single chop of the tongue.--Theathenae 16:52, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Not really, I have lived in Greece for 11 years, I know how it's pronounced, just in the same way that I know that in Tirana, qen (dog) is pronounced exectly like the Greek word κεν (your version). It is pronounced chen in Shkoder I think, it depends on the dialect. Do find a source. There is no evidence to support the existence of those phonemes in Greek. Rex(talk) 17:01, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Actually, you have just proved to yourself that those phonemes do exist. If Greek κεν is pronounced "exactly" the same as Albanian qen, as you claim, and Albanian q is the voiceless palatal plosive, as you claim, then by your own admission it exists in Greek too. But Omniglot claims Albanian q is pronounced tʃ, while κεν is not, in standard Greek at least.--Theathenae 17:17, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

According to Omniglot, if there were a Greek word κεν, it would be pronounced /kεn/. Maybe that should be made clear in the article Greek language, that palatat plosives don't exist in Greek. If they do, please provide evidence. Rex(talk) 17:22, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Omniglot does not dispute the existence of those sounds in Greek, it simply fails to mention what happens to k and g before the front vowels e and i. It is not an exhaustive analysis of Greek phonology.--Theathenae 17:17, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Really, then why don't we add clicks to the Greek language article? There is no source that says that there isn't. This is an encyclopaedia, you don't build encyclopaedias by natural deduction. It's not for me to prove that those sounds don't exist. It's for you to prove that they do exist. Rex(talk) 17:28, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Oops, would you look at that. The University of London obviously has no problem in saying that "q" is a voiceless palatal plosive. Rex(talk) 17:41, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

I guess we have a clash of sources. Mais quoi de faire?--Theathenae 17:43, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Not really. Omniglot is a private website run by an amateur polyglot. The UCL obviously carries more weight, AND says that r is a voiced alveolar tap, that rr is voiced alveolar trill, that gj is a voiced palatal plosive, that q is a voiceless palatal plosive etc. Who shall prevail? WP:RC Rex(talk) 17:46, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

So I guess you can't use Omniglot to justify your claims that there are no palatal plosives in Greek. Thanks for the clarification.--Theathenae 17:49, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

I guess so. What a pity that I created and added those tables to the Greek language article claiming the existence of palatal plosives in Greek. I kinda knew that all along :-))) Rex(talk) 17:53, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

You're a stirrer. But I knew that already.--Theathenae 17:56, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

What do you mean? I was just begining to doubt how much truth there is in my "original research" on the Greek language. Rex(talk) 17:58, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Hearing it all around you for 11 years means that you probably know better than any "respectable" source written by some academic in a distant land.--Theathenae 18:00, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Umm, if κ and γκ are palatal before ε, but not elsewhere, and there is no [k] or [g] before ε, then they're allophones, not phonemes. You could as easily claim that English has palatal stops in words like key, but it would be inappropriate to add them has separate consonants. kwami 23:34, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

No, they're also palatal before ι. Rex(talk) 23:47, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, should have said "before ε, η, υ, and ι". Palatal before front vowels, velar elsewhere. This is very common allophony. It could lead to a phonemic split eventually, as it did in English and the Romance languages.

Also, I wouldn't place too much confidence in the University of London page either. (Omniglot truly is unreliable, so we need not even go there except to get ideas to check out elsewhere.) The problem is that it is very common to give 'close enough' phonemic correspondances, and this page appears to be a homework assignment for an elementary linguistics class. The author could easily have copied the example from some other source without knowing anything of the language. (They might have had the palatal symbols merely for convenience, like you see for the Indic languages, and the author could have taken them at face value and added unjustified IPA descriptions. This happens all the time!) Or s/he could have simplified things to make the problem more accessible to the students. What you really need is a detailed phonetic description of these sounds, rather than just IPA labels. Indic langages don't have palatal stops, even though they're listed with the phonemes /c/ and /ɟ/ in dozens of references. I'm not trying to claim that Albanian doesn't have these sounds - I've never heard the language - but this isn't a convincing reference. However, there would be no need for the letters q and gj if they weren't phonemes, so I think the alphabet itself is reasonably good evidence that they are somehow different from ç and xh. And without any better reference, we might as well leave them as palatals. I just think we should confirm this if we can. kwami 23:54, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, I take some of that back. If Rex can attest that Albanian qen is pronounced as Greek κεν (that is, that it is a pure stop and not aspirated or an affricate), and furthermore that q is pronounced the same way before all other Albanian vowels, then this would be confirmation of the existance of palatal stops in Albanian, even if technically original research that should be supported elsewhere if possible. kwami 23:58, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't clarify it enough. "Γκ" and "κ" are palatal only before Close front unrounded vowels and Open-mid front unrounded vowels. Everywhere else, they're /k/ and /g/. Also, "q" and "gj" are palatal plosives (in standard Albanian at least). Proof: "çaj" means tea and "qaj" means cry. Rex(talk) 00:08, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
That doesn't prove that q is a palatal stop, only that it contrasts with ç (I presume you could just as easily contrast it with k). This leaves open the possibility that it is a palatal affricate, for example, as in some registers of Hungarian, or that it's a palatalized velar stop, etc. I'm more interested in how the q or qaj compares to the κ of κεν. kwami 00:16, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
It sounds the same. All Albanian letters always sound the same, that was Enver Hoxha's intention when he standardised the alphabet. It is intended to be idiot-proof (ie accessible by anyone). And to answer your previous question, "q" in "qen" sounds the same as "q" in "qaj" which is in turn different (only slightly) from "ç" in "çaj". Rex(talk) 00:28, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
It should be noted however that "q" is pronounced the same as "ç" in certain dialects. I think Kosovo is one of those places, but I don't know for sure. Rex(talk) 00:31, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
I think you're onto something, kwami. The audio sample provided makes q sound a lot like a Cretan κ in κενό rather than a standard Greek one. It would appear that Albanian q and gj are most likely the voiceless (ʨ) and voiced alveolo-palatal affricate (ʥ) that contrast with ç and xh, the voiceless (tʃ) and voiced postalveolar affricate (dʒ) respectively, as in Serbian.--Theathenae 13:08, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

I just downloaded the files (they weren't playable in IE either), and yes, they sure do sound like affricates, not stops. The sound quality isn't the best, and they're said rather quickly, though. Rex, if you can find sound samples of Mandarin, could you listen to retroflex zh vs. alveolo-palatal j, and tell us if that's anything like the difference between Albanian ç and q? kwami 21:01, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Yes, I'll do that. You can listen to Albanian radio at www.europaelire.org and at www.bbc.co.uk/albanian. I doubt it will help, but you may be able to pick out the letters q or gj. I know for a fact that the first words on the BBC one include BBC në Shqip. It's a bit original research I know, but listen to it and tell me what you think the q is in Shqip. Rex(talk) 21:09, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

The Chinese zh and j don't exist in Albanian. I have listened to both of them. Especially the j, it is totally different from q. Chinese J sounds more like /ts/. Rex(talk) 21:20, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Just want to add my experience about Albanian /ɟ/, /dʒ/, /c/ and /tʃ/. I am Italian, but I've been a dozen of times in Albania. I am always very curious about language matters, and tried to learn the most I could of Albanian.
Once I asked a young girl from the area of Gramsh to teach me the difference between those sounds and she repeatedly pronounced the word 'paqe' (peace) in the correct way and — to put in evidence the difference — as it was written 'paçe'. Well, to my ear there was no difference, but she laughed a lot because in her opinion the difference were clear.
It is known that if two sounds are allophones in the sound system of one's mother-tongue there is the possibility that it is not discriminable for him when in other language these are different phonemes.
This often happens to Italians when try to learn English. It is hard for us to distinguish the words 'sing' and 'sin' as in Italian [ŋ] is an allophone of /n/. The same happens for us with French city names "Cannes" and "Caen". There is plenty of exemples like this.
All of this to say that what seems not discriminable for strangers can be absolutely evident for those who speek a certain language.
Finally, I think that the exemple brought by Rex on the words "çaj" and "qaj" is the definitive proof that closes the argument.
Ninonino 09:38, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Genitive-dative case

I'm moving this discussion over from my talk page so everyone has access to it. kwami 19:42, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

Hello, I saw your edits to Albanian language. I'm concerned that they may be a bit original research. I have a recent Albanian grammar book in front of me right now and it clearly says that there exists a "gjinore" (genetive) and a "dhanore" (dative). If you look at Balkan linguistic union#Case system, it says that in the Balkan languages, the genitive and dative cases (or corresponding prepositional constructions) are merged, it doesn't say that a genetive case does not exist. You say that the equivalent of a genitive is formed by using the prepositions i/e/të/së with the dative. Your version seems to imply that a genetive does not exist. While this may be true as far as linguists are concerned, it's a rather novel way to look at it, since the genetive is listed in every Albanian gramar book. Also, if you look at Romanian grammar, they list a genetive there as well. Now I'm no linguist, but it does seem like original research and would make Wikipedia stand out like white amongst black if this novel apprach is taken. Rex(talk) 12:29, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

We can do further referencing with the Balkan Sprachbund. Meanwhile, can you give me a single noun in Albanian that has a genitive? Do any of the books that claim a genitive give a single example? (The fact that the Albanian language has separate names for genitive and dative may only mean that it translated these from Latin or Greek.)
I once found an Aymara grammar that showed the language had the exact case system of Latin. Unfortunately, Aymara is nothing like that - the author simply assumed that all languages had Latin grammar. kwami 19:57, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

Yes, but it also may not. This all seems like original research to me. In Romanian (and I know this for a fact) nominative and accusative are always identical and genetive and dative are always identical. Why can we say that Romanian has two cases instead of four. The Balkan Sprachbund is about the two cases being identical. That doesn't mean that the genetive no longer exists. Rex(talk) 20:08, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

Well, yes: If Romanian has two cases, we should say it has two cases. Why, does the article say it has four? And yes, if Albanian has a single genitive-dative case, then it has one case, not two.
I think you might be confusing the roles that case plays with morphological case itself. Hungarian is supposed to have 25 cases (there is debate about whether this is true, but that's irrelevant for my argument). Spanish has no case at all in its nouns. However, using prepositions, Spanish may well be able express the 25 cases of Hungarian. That is, the case roles may exist in both languages. Or perhaps Spanish with prepositions can only express half of the case roles of Hungarian: we still wouldn't say that Spanish has 12 cases. Spanish nouns don't inflect for case at all, and case is an inflectional category.
Take the English clause Mary! John just gave the dog a bone. Now, the case roles (that is, the equivalent cases in Latin) are vocative (Mary), nominative (John), dative (the dog), and accusative (a bone). But this has nothing to do with the English case system: English only has a genitive vs. non-genitive. There is no dative, or vocative, or accusative in English nouns, and it would be misleading to have a table of English case that listed
nominative: the dog. accusative: the dog. genitive: the dog's. dative: to the dog. vocative: O dog!. ablative: from the dog. instrumental: with the dog, etc.
This completely misrepresents the English language, but seems to be what we're doing with Albanian. kwami 20:31, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
Okay, check out Romanian nouns#Case. They talk about syntactic case and morphological case. The latter is 'case' in the traditional sense, and they say that nominative = accusative is one case, and that genitive = dative is a second case. Syntactic case (case roles) is a more ambiguous concept, and one where different authors are likely to disagree substantially depending on their theoretical bases. But morphological case is straightforward (do the nouns have a separate inflection, or do the not?), and this is what is normally illustrated in case tables. And voilà, the Romanian case table only has two entries (not counting the vocative, which we left out of the Albanian description). kwami 20:44, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

Maybe, however, on what authority are we saying that this "one case" is called dative and not genetive. It could be the other way around... After all, in Greek the "one case" is the genetive (modern greek). Rex(talk) 20:47, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

Call it genitive-dative if you like. (That's what they do in the Romanian article.) The label isn't important. The reason I chose the word 'dative' was because the genitive role is conveyed with a preposition, and I had assumed therefore that a bare noun would be interpreted as dative. If you believe that's not the case (ahem!), please correct it. kwami 21:05, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

You say: "The equivalent of a genitive is formed by using the prepositions i/e/të/së with the dative.". This seems to me that it is not exact. i/e/të/së are called "nyje përaparme" that can be translated as "preposited articles" and, as you surely know, are used also with the adjectives. Prepositions are called "parafjala" and are for exemple nga, tek, në, nëpër, me, për and so on.
I have in front of me a grammar written by Gjovalin Shkurtaj where cases are listed as five (nominative, accusative, dative, genitive and ablative). Gjovalin Shkurtaj was listed in the article we are discussing as a well known albanologist (the old article stated: ...and Gjovalin Shkurtaj who is probably the most distinguished socio-linguist in Albania today. He is the head of the Department of Linguistics at Tirana University). Now the Albanology section has been deleted. I think that Kwami's point of view on the dative-genitive merging is substantially correct, but it is a linguistical point of view and contrasts with the sense that Albanians have of their own language. They are tought at school that Albanian has five cases and will be surprised to read that they have only four (and would regard it as an error).
With respect to all. ninonino, 13 November 2005 (UTC).

[edit] Spanish - nariz

  • I thought that I should point out that in the newly added Spanish words (How Albanian compares...) the word nariz "nose" is from Latin naris, nares "nostril" and not from nasus "nose" (as the French form is).--Hraefen 15:49, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

I don't see the point of the extensive table. I understand that it is useful to put Albanian in its Indo-European context, but in a general encyclopedia article like this, it is pointless to include every IE language you can think of, unless it makes a particular point: if, for example, some Albanian form can only be connected to Tocharian or Old Prussian and no other attested IE form. I have trimmed the table, but it could probably stand further trimming. The languages that are most relevant are: representatives of several IE branches (ideally as old as possible, so Latin rather than French etc.), and languages which have been in contact with Albanian since IE unity, notably Greek, South Slavic, Romanian, and Italian (to show borrowings). But the current table doesn't show borrowings.... --Macrakis 16:09, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] paragraph

This paragraph:

Some eminent scholars in the field of Albanian language have been Johann Georg von Hahn, Franz Bopp, Gustav Meyer, Norbert Jokl, Eqrem Çabej, Stuart Edward Mann, Carlo Tagliavini, Wacław Cimochowski, Eric Pratt Hamp, Agnija Desnickaja, Martin Camaj and Gjovalin Shkurtaj. Gjovalin Shkurtaj is probably the most distinguished socio-linguist in Albania today, and he is the head of the Department of Linguistics at Tirana University.

used to be in the article. If anyone wants perhaps it can be re-phrased and re-inserted. talk to +MATIA 13:40, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Colloquial Albanian book

I listed it in the references, but according to http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/customer-reviews/0415056632/103-9290820-5194205?%5Fencoding=UTF8 :

" Many phrases taught are described as old fashioned by my Albanian friends, or from a less popular dialect. [...]Terms and reading (on the cassette) are from Kosovo. The standard, unified dialect from the capital is different."

" This book is NOT the proper albanian to learn. This was written in Kosovo dialect, which is only used in Kosovo Yugoslavia. An Albanian from Albania or Montenegro will not fully understand you and most likely make fun of you"

I don't remember if the book's author states which sort of Albanian (s)he is teaching. The back cover only says "Albanian": http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0415056632/ref=sib_rdr_bc/103-9290820-5194205?%5Fencoding=UTF8&p=S0AS&j=0#reader-page One can see a few sample pages here: http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0415056632/ref=sib_rdr_ex/103-9290820-5194205?%5Fencoding=UTF8&p=S00X&j=0#reader-page (perhaps this is a temporary link which won't work for you, but you can follow the "excerpt" link at http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0415056632/ref=sib_dp_pt/103-9290820-5194205#reader-link ) Apokrif 13:55, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

From the example pages that I read, that language is not the language which is mostly spoken in Kosovo, it is much closer to the standard language. ilir_pz 00:10, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Albanian colours

[edit] kuq - red

The Latin word for scarlet, coccinus is a loan from Greek kokkinos -> kokkos (kermes berries), Welsh has coch for red, and Albanian has kuq. Are kuq, kokkos, and coch cognates or are the Albanian and Welsh terms borrowed from Latin? It would be interesting if someone could find out. Imperial78

[edit] zi - black

Albanian zi and Welsh du /di/ sound so similar that if they are not cognates from PIE does anyone have an alternative explanation? Xhyljen 12:34, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] your answer is below

All you need to do is scroll down one post, but here it is: Albanian zi 'black' (notice the fuller plural forms zinj, zeza) is from reconstructed Proto-Albanian *džedi, from Indo-European *gwed-, which gave OE cwēad "bad", MHG quāt "dirt", Lith gé(.)da "shame", OSl gadǔkǔ "disgusting", gadǔ "reptile, worm"

Welsh du "dark", cognate with Irish dub, is from Proto-Celtic *dubios, which is akin to E deaf, and Gk typhlós "blind".

Flibjib8 17:10, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] comparison chart

i have added blertë to the list with gjelbër for 'green', and i have annotated the notes, since only kuq, verdhë, and gjelbër are borrowings (coccum, viridis, galbinus). the similarities with welsh are due to both languages borrowing the same words from latin, which therefore leads to the similarities between romanian and italian with albanian, since both are descendants of latin. though this does not include Alb zi 'black' and Welsh du, which are from entirely different sources (see below).

specific etymologies are:

- muaj 'month' < Proto-Albanian *môsnja; cf. Eng month, Lat mensis, OIr mí, Skt más, Arm amis, OSl měšecĭ, Lith ménesis

- ri - ?

- nënë 'mother'; cf. Welsh nain 'grandmother', Lat nonna 'id', Gk nânnê 'maternal aunt', nínnê 'grandmother', Bulg neni 'the other one', Russ nyanya 'child's guardian', Farsi nana 'mother', Skt naná 'mother'

- motër < Proto-Albanian *mâter; cf. Eng mother, Lat māter, Ir mathair, Gk mátér, OSl mati, Skt mātá, Toch A macar

- natë < Proto-Albanian *nakti; cf. Eng night, Lat nox, Welsh nos, Gk nýx, OSl noštĭ, Lith naktìs, Skt nákt, Hitt nekuz, Toch A naktim

- hundë - ?

- tre; cf. Eng three, Lat tres, Ir trí, etc.

- zi/zezë < Proto-Albanian *džedi; cf. OEng cwéad 'bad', MHGer quât 'dirt', Lith géda 'shame', OSl gadǔkǔ 'disgusting', gadǔ 'reptile, worm'

- blertë < OAlb blerë < Proto-Albanian *blôra; cf. Lat flōrus 'shining, bright', Welsh blawr 'grey'

- ujk < OAlb ulk < Proto-Albanian *(w)ulka; cf. Lat lupus 'wolf', Gk lýkos, Skt vr.ka, Lith vil~kas, Latv vìlks, OSl vlŭkŭ, Av vəhrkō, Eng wolf, Welsh gweilgi 'torrent'

Welsh du 'dark, black', akin to Old Irish dub, comes from Proto-Celtic dubos; cf. E deaf, Gk typhlós 'blind'

Flibjib8 21:43, 23 July 2006 (UTC) 71.74.209.129 03:06, 13 June 2006 (UTC)


Maybe dumb question: how does hundë relate to nose? I see the nd, but I am curious about the rest of the word. Jpaulm 17:19, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] history

I rewrote the history section, though I kept a portion of it at the end.

71.74.209.129 03:07, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] dialects

i have added specific information about the major characteristics that differentiate Tosk and Gheg and a number of other characteristics for other dialects in the dialect section. nothing was lost or altered.

Flibjib8 19:59, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] jpaulm hundë

hundë means 'nose' but is not in any way related to most of the words for nose in the other indo-european languages. i didn't make the chart, but i can only assume the purpose of putting it in, just like comparing 'kuq', nënë, or blertë is to show words that are not related to most other indo-european languages, to convey the mixture in albanian.

i sadly do not have access right now to orel's albanian etymological dictionary, so i can't give you an etymology of the word. all i can say is that the initial h- probably comes from an sk-, based on what else i know about albanian etymology. so, clearly, no relation to NOSE.


Flibjib8 21:34, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] display problem

On my browser (Firefox 1.5.0.6) The "Indoeuropean languages" box overlaps the section comparing the Albanian language to other Indoeuropean languages. Looks really bad. If the problem isn't just a prob with my browser, then perhaps judicious use of <p><br clear="all" /></p> might help. Ling.Nut 02:31, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The word 'jan'

The aritcle states that the word 'jan' is delivered through the roma gipsies. Well, i think that the word 'jan' is from the persian word of same meaning, as the word is used in turkish, urdu, persian, hindi and some dialects of kurdish, and that it is delivered to albanian through the ottoman empire. Hamid, 21:30, 28 september 2006

[edit] vocabulary

for whoever added the "vocabulary" section, you should be aware that you are quoting dated material. i realize that it is accepted practice to quote this bit as often as possible when in Albania, as if to establish some sort of solid link to the past, but to presume that 1) Albanian has not significantly changed in 2000 years and that 2) the modern Albanian word forms, which if truly represented in the names listed (Thetis, Dhea, Malion, etc), would discount all etymological reconstructions that attach it to indo-european, is entirely preposterous.

Take for instance Thetis, supposedly equivalent to Alb det "sea". Notice the fuller forms of Italo-Albanian dejt, dejët and dialectal dēt, both of which indicate a much larger or fuller form, and this probably just 1000 years ago. The typical reconstruction is *deubeta, related to English depth. Further, a modern d cannot come from a former th. The two cannot be linked.

please research and then revise or remove this section or i will do it for you.


Flibjib8 04:37, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

What are these mystical 12th century manuscripts that are mentioned in the vocabulary section? Does the one allegedly found in the Vatican mean the same one that was "found" couple of years ago and then revealed as a hoax? The Athonite manuscript was also news to me. Does it really mean (Balkan)Albanian or rather Caucasian Albanian? I would like to see the sources.213.216.208.231 10:14, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

BTW, "la lingua Albanesca" cannot be Latin, since Latin does not have article "la".213.216.208.231 09:53, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../a/l/b/Talk%7EAlbanian_language_46d5.html"