Open main menu


Hello, welcome to Wiktionary, and thank you for your contributions so far.

If you are unfamiliar with wiki editing, take a look at Help:How to edit a page. It is a concise list of technical guidelines to the wiki format we use here: how to, for example, make text boldfaced or create hyperlinks. Feel free to practice in the sandbox. If you would like a slower introduction we have a short tutorial.

These links may help you familiarize yourself with Wiktionary:

  • Entry layout (EL) is a detailed policy documenting how Wiktionary pages should be formatted. All entries should conform to this standard. The easiest way to start off is to copy the contents of an existing page for a similar word, and then adapt it to fit the entry you are creating.
  • Our Criteria for inclusion (CFI) define exactly which words can be added to Wiktionary, though it may be a bit technical and longwinded. The most important part is that Wiktionary only accepts words that have been in somewhat widespread use over the course of at least a year, and citations that demonstrate usage can be asked for when there is doubt.
  • If you already have some experience with editing our sister project Wikipedia, then you may find our guide for Wikipedia users useful.
  • The FAQ aims to answer most of your remaining questions, and there are several help pages that you can browse for more information.
  • A glossary of our technical jargon, and some hints for dealing with the more common communication issues.
  • If you have anything to ask about or suggest, we have several discussion rooms. Feel free to ask any other editors in person if you have any problems or question, by posting a message on their talk page.

You are encouraged to add a BabelBox to your userpage. This shows which languages you know, so other editors know which languages you'll be working on, and what they can ask you for help with.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wiktionarian! If you have any questions, bring them to the Wiktionary:Information desk, or ask me on my talk page. If you do so, please sign your posts with four tildes: ~~~~ which automatically produces your username and the current date and time.

Again, welcome!

I did originally revert your edit due mostly due to skepticism about the derivation, but then I saw the etymology at Niemiec, which has a link to the Proto-Slavic root. The only reason I didn't restore your version is that this just seems to be a repurposed plural form of that term, and your etymology is really for that term rather than for Niemcy, since a country can't be described as "a foreigner". Chuck Entz (talk) 00:57, 15 April 2015 (UTC)



The origin of this lexeme has never been satisfactorily sorted. However, the analytical version of the O.E.D. rejects any link with Danish TUDSE; but I believe that both the English form and the Danish derive from a pre-historic form, long before the Germanic peoples arrived. The general concensus of modern etymologists is to present a Germanic root wherever possible; but sometimes they miss the true point! Andrew H. Gray 17:27, 4 April 2017 (UTC)Andrew

Oh, I see wow mean it might have come from the elusive Proto-Germanic substrate theorized? What should I put?--Sigehelmus (talk) 19:46, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
@Sigehelmus You edited "in good faith", but ideally the conclusion is that its etymology is so elusive that it cannot be determined. However, there is a slight evidence that oldest form for English TOAD, that is "tadige" is of pre-Indo-European origin, or from another language family. Please see the reference to its origins on its discussion page. Please also see the Etymology Rules on (my) User Page. By the way, I put "my" in brackets since it is no more my User Page than anyone else's! Kind Regards. Andrew H. Gray 09:29, 5 April 2017 (UTC)Andrew (talk)


As regards this edit, firstly, we are not Wikipedia (so their manual of style doesn't matter here), and secondly, replacing a template with untemplated text generally means you're doing something wrong. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 23:51, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

With all due respect and goodness, the use of CE is contrived if not pretentious. AD is overwhelmingly the standard for yearly time and recognizable instantly to nearly everyone. CE is certainly notable, but far from being near the point of the dominator that AD is. To be quite frank, everyone can reasonably guess what happened around 1 "CE" anyway related to a certain divine carpenter, so the use of CE outside of some politically correct academic settings (which are normally criticized and lambasted anyway) is greatly pretentious if not POV. As a matter of fact, the use of CE may ward off average Joes coming here for actual knowledge and judge this site as some form of PC ivory tower - this effect is more common than you think. CE is useless, haughty, and barren. AD is universal. It's not about Christianity, it's about usage. This site isn't to make a point or spread a dry meme. AD must be installed and kept.--Sigehelmus (talk) 01:27, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
I got it, you have some axe to grind. You can start a discussion if you like, but don't edit-war. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 01:36, 15 April 2017 (UTC)


Do you know if it's actually pronounced that way in Spanish? It seems much more likely to me that it would be pronounced as "yoi-stic". Ultimateria (talk) 09:03, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

More likely "choi-stick", but you make a valid point: foreign words in a language may follow its phonotactic rules, but generally approximate the donor language in pronunciation. This seems like a very mechanical spelling pronunciation which would only make sense if no one had ever heard the English word pronounced. Chuck Entz (talk) 13:48, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for fixing it. Also, since it's a borrowing I would expect the stress to fall on the same syllable as in English, no? Ultimateria (talk) 09:37, 18 April 2017 (UTC)


The template you were looking for is {{l}}. Try to look how similar sections are formatted instead of guessing. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 17:14, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

oh wow, I apologize I actually did mean to put l but I wasn't paying attention...--Sigehelmus (talk) 17:16, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

The etyl templateEdit

Hey, I noticed in this diff that you still use {{etyl}}, which has been made obsolete. While an etymology using that template is still better than not adding an etymology at all, {{etyl}} is being phased out so it would probably be best to avoid its usage in favour of {{der}} (general template if you're not sure of the exact etymological relation), {{inh}} (for directly inherited terms), {{bor}} (for borrowed terms), {{calque}} (for calques), {{cog}} (to list a cognate) etc. which are more precise and allow for more useful categorization. — Kleio (t · c) 23:36, 24 July 2017 (UTC)


Please put things in their proper orders. I expect you know this by now, but you should check other existing entries or WT:ELE if you have any doubts. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 17:16, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Aaaaah sorry that was actually an oversight I wasn't paying attention...--Sigehelmus (talk)`
And this is how you request a pronunciation. —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 18:44, 11 February 2018 (UTC)


The French website Centre National de Ressources Textuelles et Lexicales here [[1]] says that the Normans may have used the term bi Gode prior to and after their assimilation into Old French society. It's likely that Normans also had some knowledge of Old/Middle English, and the term may actually be from English. There is also the Middle French swearword likely derived from the English: brulare bigot a corruption of "by our Lord, by God". Tout est prelore, bigoth may also feature a later version of this word, or it may be an independently new borrowing from German or Dutch. Apparently, bi God(e) was a well-known phrase back in those days.

I wonder if French speakers may have heard it and picked it up from the Norsemen in their early initial encounters, and it then it became sort of a time-capsuled relic-taunt and derogatory term thereafter, persisting even after the Normans may have dropped the use of bi Gode altogether from their speech. It's unclear. Leasnam (talk) 22:45, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

@Leasnam: Wow, that's incredibly fascinating context. Thank you very much for explaining this! It's particularly interesting how a phrase like that spread in the age before mass communication technology - men did move around more than many laymen think, but it's still impressive and mysterious how such a "meme" like that popularized. As you implied, perhaps the Normans acquired the phrase via cross-Channel trade (and English pilgrims travelling through Normandy to get to Paris, Santiago, Rome, etc.) with the Anglo-Saxons even predating the Conquest. I can try to add the information you gave me to the entry, but you would probably be more adept at formatting it. Another thought I have is why the French would think the Normans are particularly religious, especially within the time period (again, many weren't as religious as often thought, but I wonder why the Normans in particular were thought for being so, especially considering they were descended from Vikings in part - perhaps "convert's zeal" as we can see even today? Okay I'll stop opining here). Edit: I didn't see your hypothesis in the last part, sorry, that's good and possible as well. I wish there were more info on this.--Sigehelmus (talk) 22:58, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
The Normans were quite well-known for being, um, "religious". Many historians say the Normans fanatically used religion as an excuse to bully others around (probably the case haha). I like the way Wikiedia puts it: The Normans were famed for their martial spirit and eventually for their Catholic piety, becoming exponents of the Catholic orthodoxy of the Romance community into which they assimilated. They're nicer than I am :) Leasnam (talk) 23:06, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
@Leasnam: Ahh, that reminds me of an article I read once that essentially mentioned that the martial spirit of the ancient pagan Celts led, after Christianization, to an exceptional zeal and pious monastic feats in Ireland in particular and the British Isles in general - thus the plethora of hundreds of Hiberno-British saints in the Early Middle Ages, most of which are now obscure and/or very local aside from the big names like St. Patrick or David of Wales. Although theyear do of course have a better modern reputation than the Norman Crusaders.... Fascinating, I can expand more on this when I have time soon. Please add that source and info to bigot if you can!--Sigehelmus (talk) 23:41, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "Sigehelmus".