Wiktionary

Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2022/June

< Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium

fhefhaked edit

(Latin) I added what I found to the etymology (if better references are found replace them). Can someone add more information? Also, what is the lemma?—as this a verb form of it and thus should link to the lemma (e.g., the attested Numasiōi and statōd link to Numasios and stō, the lemma forms). J3133 (talk) 16:14, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think this particular reduplicated variant of facio is found in other conjugated forms, if that is what you are asking. Apparently, looking at *dʰédʰeh₁ti, there are similar reduplicated variants found in Greek, Indo-Iranian and Germanic. Wakuran (talk) 17:34, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Wakuran: In Latin we lemmatize verbs at the first-person singular present active indicative; thus, what is the lemma (that form) of fhefhaked? J3133 (talk) 17:40, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
A few more Latin verb forms that have retained perfective reduplication: cecidī, cucurrī, dedī, fefellī, momordī, tetigī. And of course meminī, present in sense, yet perfect in form.  --Lambiam 17:50, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
We can only guess at the reconstruction of the lemma form of faciō in such very early Latin. While *fhakio may seem a reasonable guess, I think its addition is both pointless and unwarranted. I actually have some reservations with the transliteration ⟨fh⟩ of 𐌅+𐌇. IMO this should either be ⟨vh⟩ (following the orthography) or ⟨f⟩ (following the phonetic value).  --Lambiam 17:41, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Lambiam: ⟨V⟩ is used for ⟨𐌖⟩ and ⟨𐌅⟩ is ⟨F⟩ in fēced. J3133 (talk) 06:42, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Lambiam: Is the second ⟨e⟩ of fhefhaked long? I found it as both short (when other macrons are added) and long. J3133 (talk) 06:36, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The book How to Learn Philology is explicit in stating that the -ē- stems “from the ‘ Middle ’ -ai ”,[1] referring for this to page 45. However, while page 45 is about possible origins of Early Latin ē, it does not mention ai. That diphthong is mentioned on page 44, but not in reference to an orthographic e. If it can be established that the second ⟨e⟩ of fhefhaked stems from an earlier diphthong, there can be little doubt it was long, but I have no idea what this would be based on.  --Lambiam 11:53, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don't recommend looking at books from the 19th century when investigating this sort of thing. Where do modern Indo-Europeanists say the -ē- in fēcī comes from? —Mahāgaja · talk 08:13, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

farfalla edit

RFV of the etymology. Hate to say it, but this looks a lot like Proto-West Germanic *fifaldā, Proto-Germanic *fifaldǭ. Leasnam (talk) 01:37, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If the proposed relation with parpaglione is correct these are cognates, which may go a good way towards explaining a certain similarity. An onomatopoeic element may have been involved in changing /p/ to /t/; compare Portuguese farfalhar.  --Lambiam 09:10, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

wahah in Category:Arabic terms borrowed from Coptic? edit

wahah should probably not show up in Category:Arabic terms borrowed from Coptic, should it? If not, how best to fix the responsible {{bor}}? Thanks in advance, --Marsupium (talk) 22:37, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

By fixing the langcode. Editors just wrongly copy and paste etymologies. There are a lot of these entries. And some users have lists to fix them. Fay Freak (talk) 23:33, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for explaining and fixing it! --Marsupium (talk) 23:48, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
We even have a whole page of Todo/Incorrect derivation templates ready to be cleaned up. (The page is out of date at the moment though; a lot of them have already been cleaned up.) —Mahāgaja · talk 06:36, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
TTO has another list too, not just covering etymologies but also some other templates. 70.172.194.25 06:37, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

gedunk edit

Gedunk refers to ice cream, candy, potato chips, and other snack foods, as well as to the place on a ship where these items are sold. The first known published usage of the term "gedunk" in a non-naval context is in a 1927 comic strip which refers to "gedunk [ice cream] sundaes." In 1931 it was mentioned in Leatherneck magazine; subsequent early naval usage includes Robert Joseph Casey'sTorpedo Junction: With the Pacific Fleet from Pearl Harbor to Midway (published in 1943); and Robert Olds' Helldiver Squadron: The Story of Carrier Bombing Squadron 17 with Task Force 58 (published in 1944).

[...]

The origin of the word gedunk is uncertain, though it has been suggested it derives from a Chinese word referring to a place of idleness, or a German word meaning to dunk bread in gravy or coffee.

https://www.history.navy.mil/research/library/online-reading-room/title-list-alphabetically/g/gedunk.html

The English word 'dunk' came from Pennsylvania German '

The modern German word for 'dunk' is 'tunken' (weak, third-person singular present tunkt, past tense tunkte, past participle getunkt, auxiliary haben) : https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/tunken#German

I'm not sure of the Chinese connection; anyone want to pursue that? 198.188.134.45 (talk) 23:28, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Historically, High German initial t- corresponds regularly to initial d- in other Germanic languages and dialects. Wakuran (talk) 13:35, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but this word has an original /θ/ (Old High German thunkōn), so dunken is the regular outcome and Standard German tunken is irregular. (Such irregularities occur more often in Modern German, towards d as well as towards t, which probably has to do with dialect mixing on the one hand and w:de:Binnendeutsche Konsonantenschwächung on the other.) But what difference does it make anyway? To my knowledge, English "dunk" is indeed from German (be it Pennsylvanian or other). The word "gedunk" I've never heard. 90.186.72.39 09:29, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I suspect this word comes from Malay "gedung" meaning building or, specifically in a military context, warehouse - this word was appropriated into English as 'go-down', as a lot of these warehouses in the East Indies had stairs leading down from street level. Gedunk sounds like a different pronunciation of the same word (no evidence for this but it would fit with its military origin and the fact that this word had enough influence in English to introduce 'godown'). Meconium (talk) 00:09, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

history of GOOSE vowel edit

Is this also the right place for discussions of the history of pronunciation?

According to the WP article Phonological history of English close back vowels, most dialects of modern English have the close back rounded vowel /uː/ (realized as the close central rounded vowel [ʉː] in many dialects) found in words like goose. Is this only a dialectal difference or also a historical one? The article on the second variant says "realized as back [uː] in the conservative variety of RP", which implies that it was more common in the past. Is this true of all or many dialects?

Simply put, was the word "beautiful" and were other words with the GOOSE vowel pronounced with the close back rounded vowel in most or all varieties of English in the 18th century? Even simpler put, was this the pronunciation common in performances of Handel and other vocal music and in educated speech in London at the time? --Espoo (talk) 08:54, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Middle English "oo" was /oː/ (hence the spelling). According to Great Vowel Shift, it has been /uː/ since circa 1500. So yeah, it must have been that way in the 18th century. [uː] is still a common realisation. It may be slightly diphthongised as [ʊu̯], too. Or it may be fronted to [ʉː], as you said. I don't really understand what you mean by "is this only a dialectal difference or also a historical one?" But if your question is whether the back pronunciation or the fronted one is the older, then I think it would be safe to say it's the back one. 90.186.72.39 09:20, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I was asking whether the back pronunciation occurred in all or only some dialects in the past. And apparently the answer is that the fronted pronunciation developed later and only in some dialects. So apparently the pronunciation used in performances of Handel and other vocal music and in educated speech in London in the 18th century was [uː], never [ʉː]. --Espoo (talk) 11:47, 6 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

lay as a poem or song edit

Does Etym. 1, noun, sense 3 ("A lyrical, narrative poem...") not rather belong under Etym. 5 ("A ballad or sung poem..."), either as a second sense or subsumed as a special case of the first?

It not apparant how it could be derived from the same etymology as other senses under Etym. 1, which in general concern something being put down or being at rest.

98.110.113.3 15:02, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe related, I do not see how saufen + Gelage go together. Saufgelage may still be associated with merry songs. 2A00:1028:8384:895A:645E:8EDA:90BE:D46C 01:14, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I think it is an alternative spelling of lai.  --Lambiam 10:19, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
On a related note, is Leier, Leierkasten, alte Leier really from the lyre? In this view, lay may as well relate to lyric. ApisAzuli (talk) 22:19, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Buss edit

RFV of the etymology. In particular:

  • Toponymic surname for someone living or working near a bush.

Aside from the question of "sh" vs. "ss", the explanation looks wrong: bushes are certainly important in European landscapes, but they tend not to be individually notable- certainly not what one would take one's name from. There is of course, the bush advertising an establishment that serves alcoholic beverages, but that would be different. Chuck Entz (talk) 15:37, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know about the reasoning; Bush, Busch and Bos are already rather common West Germanic surnames. Wakuran (talk) 16:13, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Wiktionary won't allow me to delete my prior comments and summarise because that's "harmful", apparently, so I've struck them out and summarised here. I was the user that added that etymology alongside the pronunciation. I've added a reference now and removed the tag. To give a little background on that etymology, Bush is a common name (more common than Buss), from which we have the (in)famous political family, and the name is derived from working or living near a bush. The page for the surname Bush states for its etymology, "Either the family name for those who live near a bush or a thicket of bushes...". Similarly, Wood comes from working or living near a wood, Hill comes from working or living near a hill, etc. When bynames started out (from which surnames are derived) in the Middle Ages, people were not literate and most did not travel very far, so the names were rather simplistic. Our page on busse provides bush as a descendent, see busse#Descendants. And our page on bush provides buss as an alternative in Middle English, see bush#Alternative_forms_3, so this relationship has been mentioned on these other related pages too. Hope that helps. 2A00:23C8:4384:FB01:44A3:3D6C:B35B:C26A 23:32, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Collapsed content

Isreal edit

Hello all- I sometimes add explanations for misspellings in a Usage Note- see Hu'nan, Portugese, etc. Could such a usage note be generated for 'Isreal'? Something that can help a person understand the origin of the error in their thinking. It has something to do with the usual English language pronunciation, which admittedly sounds like 'Isreal'. cf. Talk:Israel. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 19:34, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I do indeed hear both /ˈɪz.reɪ.əl/ (as one would expect from the spelling) and /ˈɪz.ri.əl/. This may not be a lone case, as we give Azriel as an alternative form of Azrael, and Nathaniel is in fact more common than Nathanael, the spelling used in the KJV in John 1,[2] transliterating the original Ναθαναήλ (Nathanaḗl).[3] If it can be confirmed that /ˈɪz.ri.əl/ is a common pronunciations of the name Israel, we can add it in a Pronunciation section at the entry for Israel and add a note at Isreal that it is a pronunciation spelling of /ˈɪz.ri.əl/.  --Lambiam 10:06, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I definitely have /ˈɪzɹiəl/ as my most common spoken pronunciation. I think of it as a change of /ə/ to /i/ before another vowel, as evidence also by Judaism /ˈd͡ʒudi.ɪzəm/. Nevertheless, I suspect Isreal is not so much a pronunciation spelling as simply a reflection of the fact that ea is a far, far more common sequence of letters in English than ae is. —Mahāgaja · talk 18:25, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Meaning of "splint" in "shin splint" edit

What is the meaning of "splint" in "shin splint"? Does it stand for "pain", or for some other word? I googled but found no answer. --CopperKettle (talk) 06:20, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A qualified guess is that it would stand for split/ splintered, as in torn... Wakuran (talk) 11:48, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! I hope someone adds a good-sourced explanation on the page. For a non-native speaker, the meaning of "splint" is not intuitively clear here. --CopperKettle (talk) 04:56, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't really got a source for my claim, however... Wakuran (talk) 21:30, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

yeet edit

As Prime asked on Talk:yeet: is there evidence for our statement that this was originated by Jeremy Clarkson? Are we sure he's the oldest use, and, is there evidence that the 2010s internet use is due to his 1998 use? As noted on talk, a word or noise like this, said when throwing something, exists in other (seemingly unconnected) times, places, and media, e.g. a 1999 episode of the US TV show King of the Hill has, as someone noted on talk and as I was just able to track down and confirm, a similar sound when a character throws a tape recorder. - -sche (discuss) 20:20, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure the wording “originating” implies causality for all later occurrences.
On the other hand you will never prove all individual connections. For a relatively to this better documented sound word: How is the mechanism whereby all those users of yawk acquired their word? The paths of this word are within dark neighbourhoods since Schoolboy Q “originated” it in 2012 – at least the individual being a source is verisimile enough that for simplicity we may state one originator. If there are fans then it is not unreasonable that some users are users because they are fans, but this common occurrence of language development taking place in internal and ephemeral fandom is always a conjecture related by some who believe to remember and deleted and never permanently recorded at most places. This works even up to such basic terms like organism cultivars if we believe the common theory about the origin of the name of the greengage having a sole horticulturalist’s note as the sole evidence: new words use to kick off in niches, and the only people who find it necessary to specifically log words are we. Fay Freak (talk) 22:14, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think this viral YouTube video showing Clarkson supposedly saying the word is what inspired the folk etymology. I hear /jiːt/ followed by /iːt/, so in context it's likely that what he said was "Eat [this], eat." That doesn't rule out the modern usage originating from fans of the show imitating that pronunciation, but it seems unlikely. Wqnvlz (talk) 16:08, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
C'mon you guys, apparently "yeet" has PIE origins!!1 What a fool though, iēcī is clearly much closer to jack up (cp. hoch jagen, jack, lumberjack, &c. ApisAzuli (talk) 10:05, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

кундья edit

Can someone check whether the derivation from "Proto-Greek" is plausible? None of the Finnic cognates I checked mentioned it, but there are sources. 70.172.194.25 06:55, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The title of the source says it all: “Establishing the West-Ugric Language Family with Minoan, Hattic and Hungarian by a Decipherment of Linear A”. Welcome to the graveyard of theories regarding the language of Linear A.  --Lambiam 09:30, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Thadh, Lambiam: am I right to infer that the etymology of Рава (Rava) may also be dubious? 70.172.194.25 12:54, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
“Borrowed from” was almost certainly incorrect. Cognacy is much more lax. All pairs of descendants of PIE have cognate terms. While Moksha is not in the IE family, the name of the river may have been borrowed from some IE language. I don’t know what the cited source states; I am somewhat doubtful that Zabelin's opus История русской жизни с древнейших времен has been translated to English, but even if it has, it dates from 1876 and the scholarship may not be quite up-to-date. I have been unable to find the term in the Russian editions at the Internet Archive, but that may be due to the poor OCR. It may not be total nonsense; L&S cite an Ancient Greek geek who claims that the name ῥᾶ (rhâ) for rhubarb stems from the plant growing near the river Rha (mod. Volga). The Greeks may also have borrowed the name from a local non-IE language. The similarity of the names Rha and Rava for this river may be a coincidence, but then it is a striking coincidence.  --Lambiam 13:54, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Good finds. I changed it to use {{cog}} and say "Possibly cognate". If you want to add other sources or information, feel free. 70.172.194.25 14:06, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I've skimmed through the book and the only passage I could find that could even remotely support this etymology is on page 234, where the author claims the Ancient Greek river name "Оаръ" (Oar) can be found as the Mordvinic term "Рау" (Rau). Thadh (talk) 14:15, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Several sources give the Moksha name as Рав.  --Lambiam 08:50, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

קליפה edit

Is there a source supporting the claim that the Hebrew term is from Aramaic? I left a comment on Talk:קליפה with some sources that do not make this association. 70.172.194.25 13:07, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yana edit

RFV of the etymology.

This entry started out as a Latin-script Bulgarian entry with an etymology consisting of a strange mix of Hebrew and Greek. Other unrelated senses were tacked on without changing the etymology. I've separated out the California Indian etymology, but the rest still needs work. For one thing, I'm not sure the river name is related to the given name. Chuck Entz (talk) 15:14, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

duh edit

I wonder if the etymology of duh comes from the mockery of a person to show that the person's unintelligent. So I have some questions.

Duh example sentences demo:

Someone: "I'm Steven! Duh, I like to tattletale and get people in trouble!"


Sam: "Hey Johnny do you know who was the previous president?"

Johnny: "It's Donald Trump, duh!"


A person with lack of intelligence wouldn't know to speak that much, so would that contribute to the origin of the word "duh"?

Would duh as in the 2nd example also come from being unintelligent? Chuterix (talk) 02:30, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It is very plausible. The American Heritage Dictionary has: “Imitative of an utterance attributed to slow-witted people.”[4] The pronunciation [d̪əː] or [d̪ʌː] fits with the theory that this stems from mockery.  --Lambiam 08:38, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
AHD explanation sounds good to me. DCDuring (talk) 18:46, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't think so. I find the text difficult to comprehend, which may actually be due to the problem being difficult (or because I'm triggered). There are at least two sides to this. Bythe way, plausible is akin to applaud and I see nothing worthy of applause in calling anyone stupid stupid.
At first, one might argue that speech can be prone to construct utterances with low complexity. This isn't necessarily due to being "intelligent" (as a matter of efficiency) and I don't believe that's what you mean, so I shouldn't dwell on it. Just note that grammarians have made all sorts of mistaken, eg. by supremacist convictions, when it comes to describing language that is new to them. The same could be said of language development and the assumption that speech capability were inherently innate.
Secondly, the intonation of the word "duh" is often times affected (my point of reference is Lisa Simpson) to mimic a sort of impaired speech, cp. hurr durr ("of the stereotypical idiot"), HODL (originally a typo), derp (q.v., maybe from duh), that might be supposed to reflect on the speaker's opinion about things they deem unintelligable or "stupid". So the question is if duh may have been nothing more than that in origin, an arbitrary sign of disdain. More to the point, filler words like uhm, äh, etc. might appear arbitrarily when at a loss for words. Yet, they are usual, maybe conventional or conventionally proscribed. So I don't think that it's random.
Anyway, as the above comparanda show, you do have a point, so what are the actual questions?
Take care, tho. This is the etymology scriptorium where we describe it as per WT:ETY. The sociolinguistics and language development theoretic aspects receive typically less attention (debatable: these aspects receive just as much attention in theory and that's just not enough). I reckon it could be from an allomorph of though (or tho), which corresponds phonologically like the articles the ~ da. Beyond that, I'm trying to find identical uses of German du where I understand it as 2nd person appellative, but I have no hopes of this going anywhere. ApisAzuli (talk) 09:10, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Origin of -amundo edit

The page for -amundo claims that it's possibly related to the Spanish word mundo (“world”). Given its use as an intensifier, it seems far more likely to me that it's derived from mondo (“very”). Binarystep (talk) 12:14, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's some mangling of -mente, naturally. I wasn't sure of when adjective "mondo" was first attested, although Random House seems to state 1965-1970. [5] Wakuran (talk) 12:28, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps, but it's probably influenced in form (at least) by mundo, if only because the latter is one of the more familiar words to English speakers. Chuck Entz (talk) 15:20, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm okay with something like
"adapted borrowing from Spanish or Italian -mente, with ending from Spanish mundo (world), perhaps inspired by adjective mondo (extremely, excessively), borrowed from the Italian mondo film movement, from the title "Mondo Cane" ("Dog's World"), cognate to the Spanish word".
Concise and succinct, if it doesn't require sourcing... Wakuran (talk) 17:13, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
All this is only guesswork, that needs to be hedged by terms like perhaps. Was it used before the Fonz did? Otherwise it was basically coined by the scriptwriters of Happy Days, and unless they come clean we can only guess where they were coming from. Unlike -mente, which forms adverbs, -amundo also forms adjectives. If coined in Happy Days, it is more plausibly from specifically Italian -mente, since the Fonzarelli character is of Italian-American extraction.  --Lambiam 19:14, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Finnish -eta (-ne-) edit

The theory that this is from a Proto-Uralic *-me- seems to be fairly well established. It was repeated by Aikio (Proto-Uralic, in The Oxford Guide to the Uralic Languages (2022)), but is much older (already found in Hakulinen's Suomen kielen rakenne ja kehitys, § 67. 4, and even there already treated as an older theory). The shift in Finnic from -m- > -n- appears to be analogous through participial and infinitive forms (in which a regular *-me-t... > *-mt... > *-nt... and then spread to other forms).

The original Finnic first infinitive form would have then regularly been *-ne-tak > *-ne-dak > *-nnak (*valget'ak < hypothetical **valgennak), but in Northern Finnic something caused the stem to be reworked when followed by a *t into something like *-nt'ak (first infinitive), where the *n was then lost. To the contrary, in Estonian, -neda suggests a development back into *-nedak. Do we know any more details? — SURJECTION / T / C / L / 18:02, 11 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Alternatively, could the infinitive ending *-et'ak for *-ne- be taken straight from katketa-type verbs (like haljeta, katketa, lohjeta, ratketa...)? The semantics are quite similar. — SURJECTION / T / C / L / 08:37, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Central Plain edit

What language is Central Plain calqued from? One potential option would be Japanese, since 中原 means central plain in Japanese. But that would be silly because we assume that 'Central Plain' doesn't come from the language of an island off the Asian mainland- it comes from the langauge of the place where the Central Plain is located. That language is Mandarin Chinese. Hence I change the calque to cmn. (diff) --Geographyinitiative (talk) 22:43, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Chiming in -- if you don't know for sure if it's from Mandarin, isn't zh safer as a lang code? It's plausible enough that the source might have been Cantonese or Min Nan, considering where Europeans have been trading with China. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 19:45, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
... or, more to the point I was trying to make, if this came from written Chinese, the specific dialect is largely irrelevant... ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 21:43, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ota آغاج and tr ağaç edit

The word آغاج (hence ağaç) is perhaps derived from Old Turkic *ï (“vegetation, plant, bush, tree”) but its morphology isn't clear. It could be made with the diminutive suffix +(X)ç but A Grammar of Old Turkic (p. 145) states “[…] +(X)č added for endearment to terms for family members.” Any other hypotheses? Dohqo (talk) 01:55, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

While I don't know a lot about the Turkic languages. I do know that Old Turkic is not the same thing as Proto-Turkic. Instead, it's the earliest-attested (that is, its speakers were the first to learn to write) of the descendants of Proto-Turkic, but it's in a different branch of the family from the one that gave rise to modern Turkish. Of course, it's early enough that it's not all that different from its ancestor- but it's not the same.Chuck Entz (talk) 05:05, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
We have Proto-Turkic *ïgač deriving from *ï (“vegetation”) also attested by some descendants and derivatives (but not Oghur Turkic ones, so it seems just Common Turkic). If this means “vegetation”, the former literally signifies a “vegetator” formed with ـغج (-gac, -gıc, -gec, -gic). Fay Freak (talk) 08:11, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It is not clear, though, whether Proto-Turkic already had (an ancestor of) this suffix. The agent noun sense is often not evident.  --Lambiam 09:04, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ağıl edit

The sense “halo” could've been developed due to being contaminated with ak (“white”). Also it could've been calqued from Persian terms like خرمن ماه, خرگاه ماه etc. However, an etymological distinction can be considered. Dohqo (talk) 09:20, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hrach Martirosyan once asked me to find additional typological parallels for Old Armenian բակ (bak, “courtyard, sheepfold > halo”). I have collected my findings at բակ (bak). As you can see, the sense development is common across languages. Vahag (talk) 09:33, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That doesn't answer whether ak ("white") may have been involved. It's a fair question, seeing for example that i. electro- may be considered a byform of helio-, however uncertain, whereas ii. Tocharian kauṃ (“sun”) refers to Proto-Turkic *kün (“sun, day”) (also "sunny place"). iii. Halo on the other hand may be compatible with PIE *ǵʰelh₃- ~ *ǵʰley- (cp. Irish gealán (“aurora; whiting”), En. glisten, and from zero-grade gold), by my limited understanding. iv. ἅλως ("threshing floor", "halo") is no less uncertain, mind. If the "threshing floor's circular threshold" was significant, I would expect that Ger. Hof (“halo, areola”) belongs to hoop (“rim”) rather than hovel (“hut”), ie. *kewp- and not contradistinct *kewb- -- the common denominator might be *(s)kew- (s.v. house), but further relation with obscurus seems contestable.
aura, most notably, falls into the same ostensible pattern if from αὔρᾱ (“breeze”), inasmuch as the classical courtyard serves to chill. There is the clumsy suggestion that this is "from the ancestor of ᾱ̓ήρ (āḗr)." That is *h₂ews- "dawn" or "east". Albeit, fairly close come PIE *h₂eHs- (s.v. āreō, thus areola "aurora"), *h₁ews- (s.v. ūrō), *h₂weh₁- for that matter (s.v. ἄημι, atmo-, wind), or *h₂wes- (s.v. αὐλή), etc., etc. As for aurora ("northern lights"), the Arabic translation may serve as well for analogy:
شَفَق (šafaq) + قُطْبِيّ (quṭbiyy) ("... ruddy light ... (obsolete) aloof region confining on a location, ..." + "polar"). According to an Egyptian informant, the first element is "from the book" and refers to "in the air ... where things come together ..."???
In the same sense, I do wonder if Lebanese مصاري ("money"), and its etymon مِصْر (miṣr) ("Egypt", "border", "separate area") belong here. The Indian determinant of mali offers a similar tangent, that is etymologically "garden" and "money" respectivelly.
If *strālu ("arrow", cp. German Strahl (“ray, beam”), eg. of the sun) serves for reference, then *ok (“arrow”) should come to mind. There seems to be no verb that could explain ok as deverbal with *-k (see however ouch#translations, αχ (akh), وخ, אח (“an expression of dismay”))? However, we do have PIE *h₂ḱrós for "tip" with ᾰ̓́κρος (“at the edge”), PSla. *ostrъ (“sharp”), cp. Cs. ostrostřelec either way; NB: AGr. ὀϊστός (oïstós) and ῑ̓ός (īós, “arrow”) are apparently not here.
Mongolian сум (sum, “arrow, district”) further refers to calquing from Proto-Tungusic ...
Doese an of that make sense? ApisAzuli (talk) 13:32, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

German Dietrich edit

Latin Theodericus lists German Dietrich as descendant; Proto-Germanic *Þeudarīks does too (without Latin); and Dietrich refers to Proto-Germanic and not Latin. That's contradicting. --Akonada (talk) 02:30, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Is there anything about the phonemic shape of Dietrich that would suggest it wasn't simply inherited into German? Nicodene (talk) 07:12, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The forms with initial lisping sounds would seem to have been inherited from Germanic, any way. Wakuran (talk) 10:18, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
/θ-/ > /d-/ is regular for German anyway. Nicodene (talk) 20:43, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I see several variants of Latin listed with initial D-, although /tʰ-/ or /t-/ > /d-/ isn't any regular Latin sound shift, unlike Continental West Germanic /θ-/ > /d-/ . Wakuran (talk) 23:19, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I would suppose that the Latin variants with /d-/ were borrowed from one or more Germanic varieties which experienced that sound change. Nicodene (talk) 03:28, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think we can confidently remove Vulgar Latin Deudoricus etc. and Vulgar Latin Diedericus (including the assumed loans into Dutch and German) from the descendant list of Latin Theodericus, for the reasons mentioned by @Wakuran and @Nicodene. –08:13, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

Land of the Long White Cloud edit

Is this a bona fide calque if the word 'land' is not even alleged to be present in the Maori word? --Geographyinitiative (talk) 10:57, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

One may dub it a "loose calque", like we do for Land of the Rising Sun.  --Lambiam 10:28, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Defeated by our grotty module infrastructure -- {{haw-IPA}} makes some bad assumptions, such that Hawaiian tūtū, pronounced /ˈtuːtuː/, is mistakenly rendered as /kuːˈkuː/. I've got a self-described nearly-native-speaker friend from Kaua'i who clearly pronounces this as /ˈtuːtuː/, agreeing with the Ulukau.org entry.
I'll remove the template call and kludge this manually at both Aotearoa and tūtū so at least it's displaying correctly. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 21:27, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Given these errors we should probably try and check for other such errors... - -sche (discuss) 18:24, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup? opdukke and opduiken edit

Discussion moved from Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2022/May#Cleanup? opdukke and opduiken.

anon added cognate, which seems reasonable but I have not the resources to hand to research. Amgine/ t·e 13:08, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure on whether it's a strict cognate, as much as a calque from the same roots. I guess German auftauchen and Dutch opduiken might be cognates, though, although one of them might also have calqued another. Wakuran (talk) 23:21, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Since Proto-Germanic, as reconstructed, did form verbs with an adverb as their first component (*innganganą, *uppijaną, *ūtijaną), it is not implausible that these verbs (also Swedish uppdyka and Norwegian oppdukke[6]) are not merely parallel formations but have a common ancestor *uppdūkaną.  --Lambiam 10:20, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Also, Danish is not my first language, but I think that the split version dukke op would be more common. (In Continental West Germanic, I think there still is a common system with these verbs being unsplit in the infinitive tense, but split in the present tense etc. if I remember correctly.) Wakuran (talk) 14:50, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

वीज् (vīj) edit

A similar word is found in almost all the Dravidian languages so it was probably also there in Proto Dravidian but is it loaned from Proto Dravidian or is it a native word loaned into Proto Dravidian? AleksiB 1945 (talk) 16:20, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Apte additionally knows "go". Hence I'm tempted to say it might be a wanderwort, literally. ApisAzuli (talk) 07:06, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I havent seen a similar word even in Iranian and since there arent any cognates in other IE branches but there are Dravidian ones couldnt it be a loan from Proto Dravidian? AleksiB 1945 (talk) 10:03, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I cannot argue for Dravidian. Haven't worked anything out but the syntheses of going and blowing is sailing, cf. sail, cp. velum (“a sail”) and veil for the vocalism.
German Wedel (“fan, swiffer”) comes close, cp. wehen (“to blow (of wind)”) ([7]), Skr. √vā; Persian: وز (vaz); Latvian: vȩ̄ss (“fresh, cool”). The vocalism requires i if I understand correctly: cp. willow ~ German {{m|enWeide, synonym in another sense with Wiese (“lawn”)? On that note, I noticed that Proto-Dravidian "north" and "plain, open field" look similar, whereas "south" may be considered a loan into South-Dravidian. Further comparison with Vietnamese is what tipped me off on sailing before I saw Apte. Albeit, "go" isn't much to go on.
On the other hand I, Fächer (“fan”) might sound similar as well, that would ironically imply the exact opposite of cooling if from focus. So? See there for more. I find Skr. psú quite attractive to compare with psyche (from AGr. "to blow", origin ultimately unknown). Although there's no immediate connection between them, there may have been extensive tradenetworks for tin before the bronze age collapse, according to Eric Cline. Further consideration about baths and banyas take me to Georgian, according to Furnée, which Beekes dismissed without consideration in favor of pre-Greek. Ignorance is bliss. ApisAzuli (talk) 10:42, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Seems like from Proto-Indo-European *h₂weh₁- (“to blow”) AleksiB 1945 (talk) 14:02, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I mean, does that explain anything more than *w-? 2A00:20:6011:114E:D802:C48C:E748:3490 22:05, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think the word was probably something like h₂weh₁-ǵ or -ge with e deleted; eH sometimes becomes ī too like in *h₂eh₂óyḱe > ईष्टे (īṣṭe), ईशे (īśe) AleksiB 1945 (talk) 09:57, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If you look at the page, we'd expect *HuH- rather than *Hw(i)H- in the case of zero'd *Hw(e)H-, but I'm not sure. ApisAzuli (talk) 15:20, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The dravidian is in DrED [8] I take it. ApisAzuli (talk) 16:57, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Descendants of Latin asthma? edit

In October of 2019, an IP added this to the descendants of Ancient Greek ἆσθμα (âsthma) using the {{desctree}} template, but it was only today that a Latin entry was created. Now the Ancient Greek entry is in Category:Latin descendants to be fixed in desctree because the Latin entry has no Descendants section. There are two ways to fix this: add a Descendants section to the Latin entry, or change {{desctree}} in the Ancient Greek to {{desc}}.

That raises the question: which descendants of Ancient Greek ἆσθμα (âsthma) borrowed this from Latin asthma, and which borrowed it directly from the Ancient Greek? It's actually a fairly tricky question, because the descendants all have romanized spellings that could be either the result of applying romanization rules borrowed from Latin or of borrowing the word itself- it's probably impossible to tell the difference from the end result. There's at least one descendant that says Latin in its etymology and others that say Ancient Greek, but that may be arbitrary. Chuck Entz (talk) 20:33, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Early texts using the term were invariably treatises written in Latin,[9][10][11] so the most reasonable assumption is that it entered the general medical vocabulary via Latin, like so many medical terms with Greek roots (alopecia, dyspnea, lethargy, rheumatism, strangury, ...). Although we present pneumonia as being straight from Ancient Greek, I’m fairly sure this term also took the Latin route.  --Lambiam 21:35, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. It's best to take borrowing via Latin as the default for medical terms of ultimately Greek origin found in western languages. That is, given that the terms are well-attested in 'Medical Latin'. Nicodene (talk) 21:49, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Just to complicate things: it turns out that the Middle English spelling is asma, which apparently comes from Latin asma, a variant of asthma. Chuck Entz (talk) 23:19, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
My rough rule of thumb in cases like this is to assume that, barring evidence to the contrary, words in historically Catholic or Protestant languages come from Latin, while words in historically Orthodox languages come from Greek. Won't be true 100% of the time of course, but often enough. —Mahāgaja · talk 08:11, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Expected Mandarin Reflex Prediction Rewrite edit

I've just rewritten the Mandarin prediction part in Module:ltc-pron/predict in order to ensure that all characters (phonological positions) have a corresponding predicted reflex (previously some finals are not predicted for certain initials, and the unpredicted finals are denoted by "-"). Anyone interested please check whether the implantation is correct and notify me if there are any bugs. Graphemecluster (talk) 10:27, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Graphemecluster Judging by the 142 Chinese entries that just appeared in CAT:E, I would say there's a bug. Chuck Entz (talk) 14:39, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Chuck_Entz Thanks for reporting. Now the bugs have been fixed and I have to thank @Fish bowl for fixing it (later I improved the fix). I didn't know the existence of the CAT:E before, thank you for mentioning and everyone please accept my sincere apology for the inconvenience caused by the bugs before. Graphemecluster (talk) 03:24, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ungka-puti edit

In a zoology book from the 19th century, it is claimed this was the name given to the agile gibbon on the islands of Sumatra [12]. Any clue to what language that would be, so we can add it to the etymology? Wikipedia suggests Sumatra has over 52 languages spoken, and I imagine some have gone extinct since the publication of the book. I'll leave this to anyone with specialist linguistic skills. Pious Eterino (talk) 10:25, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Pious Eterino: Ungka is Malay for "gibbon". "Ungka-puti" looks like a shortened form of ungka tangan putih, "white-handed gibbon" (= lar gibbon). The other form mentioned in the source "Ungka-etam" corresponds to ungka tangan hitam, "black-handed gibbon" (= agile gibbon). Cf. these Malaysian stamps with Malay and English legends plus the scientific name. –Austronesier (talk) 21:01, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

வெண்ணிலா (veṇṇila) and వెన్నెల (vennela) edit

Are these two cognates? They relate to the moon/moonlight and the Telugu న్న cluster corresponds to Tamil ண்ண as in the set of cognates அண்ணா (aṇṇā) and అన్న (anna). TheAwesome21 (talk) 04:59, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Tamil word is probably from veṇ "white" and nilā "moon" and many of the old Telugu ṇ became n and the PD form of nilā has an e (Telugu didnt under go the eCa > iCa change) so they are probably cognates AleksiB 1945 (talk) 09:52, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Reconstruction:Latin/-idio edit

RFV of the etymology.

The given etymology can be easily sourced, however, I believe it is an old etymology and very likely incorrect. Something in my gut tells me that *-idiō is really a borrowing from the West Germanic or Gothic descendant of Proto-Germanic *-itjaną (“-ize”), which is the cognate to the Greek-derived -izō and carries the same meaning. I suspect that past etymologists may have assumed *-idiō was a variant of the the Greek suffix because it has not yet widely known then that *-itjaną existed. The Germanic suffix is simply a better fit both in form, and in the time and region where its descendants appear, and seems to be used more informally/casually than descendants of -izō are in Romance languages. Leasnam (talk) 14:00, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Leasnam Most importantly of all, the entry should be deleted, as that ending is well-attested and in that exact spelling.
The etymology, however, is accurate and in no way outdated: it represents an overwhelming consensus, and I am not aware of, nor have I been able to find, a single source that disputes it- and for good reason. At first, the ending is found only in Greek borrowings, not native words; note the famous baptidiare < Greek βɑπτιζειν, alongside the more literary form baptizare (cf. also acontidiare, colopidiari, exorcidiare < Greek ɑκοντιζειν, κολɑφιζειν, εξορκιζειν alongside acontizare, colaphizare, exorcizare). This is already the case during the time of the Roman empire, well before any heavy Germanic influence. It simply represents the adaptation, in casual speech at least, of a Greek *[dz] to an emerging, and native, Late Latin sound such as *[ɟʝ] or *[dʑ]. Cf. numerous inscriptions of the ⟨zanuario⟩ and ⟨zebus⟩ type (= Latin ianuario and diebus, both native words).
It is true that medieval and modern Romance shows -iser/-izar/etc. in learned borrowings of Greek origin, but that in no way invalidates the above etymology. The same ending can be borrowed in different eras and with different results. In fact, the earliest layer of borrowings, already found in early Classical Latin, show -issare as the outcome of the Greek ending in question (cf. patrissare, malacissare, moechissare). Apparently, at that time, native /ss/ was the best approximation for the Greek sound.
Finally, I am not aware of a single Germanic word with the ending that you have indicated which was borrowed into Romance with -idiare > French -oyer, Italian -eggiare, Spanish -ear. I have checked the entries in Category:French terms derived from Proto-Germanic, Category:Italian terms derived from Proto-Germanic, and Category:Spanish terms derived from Proto-Germanic for good measure. Nicodene (talk) 20:42, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It has to be plausible that the suffix was merged, having begun as -idiare from Greek, but it clearly shows conflation with -itjaną in some words, especially in words relating to addressing as pronouns (e.g. French/Old French tutoyer is suspiciously similar in formation to Middle English thouten (“to address as "thou"”) (Old English *þūtan, *þūttan; Middle High German duzen, dutzen, dützen (“to address as "du"”) despite the creation of Anglo-French tutoiser additionally adding an -iser onto it making it a double suffix; and French voussoyer (Old French votoier) with Middle English yeten (“to address as "ye"”). Curious where the intermedial t in the French terms comes from, is it related to the t/z in ME/MHG (?). And although you may not be able to find a word containing the suffix in Old Germanic borrowed into Romance, it is still nonetheless found appended to several words of Germanic origin in French (e.g. giboyer, guerroyer, blondoyer, louvoyer, etc.) even if we cannot verify whether or not an ancient Germanic parent term existed. Our Wiktionary Categories are not exhaustive nor comprehensive (yet), and searching for words containing the suffix -itjaną elsewhere turn up very little. Leasnam (talk) 07:17, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
None of these examples shows that the suffixes 'merged', and French hanter is a clear counterexample.
What you have found is two French verbs which show the addition of an intervocalic consonant to break hiatus, which is nothing unusual for French (cf. pouvoir). Once that is accounted for, the ending of the verbs (-oyer, not *-toyer) bears zero resemblance to the ending of the Middle English examples, even ignoring the stress difference. In any case, scrounging around for chance resemblances does not make for a compelling theory.
The fact that the French ending -oyer is attached to some nouns or adjectives borrowed from Germanic does nothing to support your case, if you cannot show evidence of a single corresponding verb with *-itjana in Germanic. What they do show is that the French ending was productive, which was never in doubt. Nicodene (talk) 12:47, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
hanter is a later borrowing from (Old) English, where the suffix was already in process of being fossilised and not seen as a suffix in French, so it's really not a valid counterexample in this case. pouvoir et al. like fleuve show a potential change of intervocalic d > ð > v, so insertion of a consonant (could it have been any random consonant ?) is not a very assuring explanation (hrrm, today I feel like adding a t, last week it was a v) - everything has a reason. And why would it be a t - of all consonants you haven't explained why t. <<The fact that the French ending -oyer is attached to some nouns or adjectives borrowed from Germanic does nothing to support your case>> - correct, it was not intended to. That it is appended to such does show that it is, as you say, productive, but also very informal (as pointed out further above), which is odd for such a noble affix of such antiquitous heritage. I'll do some more research to get to the truth. This helps in pointing me in the right direction though. I'll just have to peer further beneath the carpet to find the answer to this puzzle. Thank you. Leasnam (talk) 14:05, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You had presented a Middle English thouten as a purported source of Middle French tutoyer, so I don't see how hanter is any more invalid an example than that. Not to mention that the latter is attested three centuries earlier in French and is an undisputed borrowing with the Germanic ending- in fact the only one shown so far.
For pouvoir, Old French has the attested transitional forms without any intervocalic consonant (poëir, poöir) so it really is epenthesis. As for why tutoyer ended up with /-t-/ in particular, the TLFi (https://www.cnrtl.fr/etymologie/vouvoyer) point to the word's initial /t/. The parallelism with vouvoyer is clear, in any case.
There isn't anything 'noble' about a morpheme just because it was borrowed from Greek. Latin, especially in its lower registers, borrowed plenty of Greek words with decidedly non-'noble' senses such as 'punch', 'dish', 'knee joint', and 'recipient sodomite'.
I don't see any puzzle here but more research can never hurt. Nicodene (talk) 22:28, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
<<You had presented a Middle English thouten as a purported source of Middle French tutoyer, so I don't see how hanter is any more invalid an example than that.>> - Ah no, I didn't say that it was the source, just a parallel/similar formation (i.e. (second person singular pronoun) + *-ittjan/*-itjaną. Sorry if I didn't make that clear enough. Leasnam (talk) 01:49, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There's a parallel with abessen, kannste abessen, and p.p. gegessen, die Sache ist gegessen, alternatively jegessen, jejessen.
guerroyer may not have a clear cognate but wirren, wirren und irren, irr und wirr ([13]), imo it might be rhotacized through assimilation. At least it shows the thematic vowel. ApisAzuli (talk) 06:23, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That's very wyrd. ApisAzuli (talk) 06:25, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
A clear cognate would be along the lines of OHG *werrezzen (“to cause confusion”), yet that doesn't seem to exist. -ezzen doesn't seem to be super common. The nearest attested "look-alike" term would be wārezzen (“to assure, guarantee”) but that is based on the word for "truth, assurance" not "confusion". Leasnam (talk) 14:55, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Another point to note: descendants of -idiare are or were productive throughout the Romance language family, including languages as far-flung as Sardinian and Aromanian. Languages where Germanic influence, to judge by the lexicon, was negligible at best.
Incidentally, I see no way for French -oyer to derive phonetically from some Germanic *-itjan, as /-tj-/, never yields /-j-/ in French. Nicodene (talk) 15:01, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No one is saying -oyer derives directly from -it(t)jan, the proposal is that -idio derives from -it(t)jan (cf crier/cridare < *krītan, hadir/hair (mod. haïr) < *hatjan, etc.). In West Germanic it seems the suffix was in decline, but we do not know how productive it may have been in the various East Germanic languages. The "far-flungedness" can be accounted for by borrowing, can it not ? Aren't Romance languages notious borrowers of one another's words ? :) Leasnam (talk) 14:50, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don't follow. In what way were *krītan or *hatjan supposed to help this case? Neither of them ended up with -y- in French, or anything resembling -oyer.
Showing at least a single example of a Vulgar Latin verb with -idiare (either attested or reconstructed by Romance linguists) that was borrowed as such from Germanic is a hard prerequisite. Without that, there is zero reason to take the case seriously. Nicodene (talk) 17:53, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Is there at least one or two other examples of words where Greek z become d or di in Latin ? I'm not being smart, I'm genuinely curious. Leasnam (talk) 18:36, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes.
  • The boundaries of pure morphology: Diachronic and synchronic perspectives, page 69: catomidiare, lactidiare, gargaridiare.
  • Los verbos latinos en -izare (-issare, -idiare), pages 354–359: citharizare/-idiare, iudaizare/-idiare, paregorizare/-idiare, patrizare/-idiare, psalmidizare/-idiare, sinapizare/-idiare.
All Greek words. Nicodene (talk) 21:01, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No. You didn't understand what I asked. All these words are using the same -idiare suffix. So let me ask again: Are there other words that show a change from Ancient Greek z to di in Latin OUTSIDE of the sequence -idiare ? For example (hypothetical fake words) Greek zoné becomes Latin diona, Greek azesthai becomes Latin adiesthae, etc. ? Leasnam (talk) 03:10, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You hadn't specified 'other than in the sequence -idiare'.
In any case, yes. See here. Nicodene (talk) 06:09, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

moi edit

The current etymology of the Vietnamese entry is from Ferlus, 2007, can be accessed from the Mon-Khmer Comparative Dictionary. This would probably be considered the "mainstream" etymology. This etymology was added by me. The reverted etymology was also added by me, based on an entry from Từ điển Mường-Việt (2002), attesting the word bol with perfectly matching/identical semantics. This attestation negotiates all possible connections with the cognate set reconstructed as Proto-Mon-Khmer *ɟmuul ~ *ɟmuəl by Shorto (2006), as the correspondence of the onset between the Muong form, the Vietnamese form, and the reconstructed item, is irreconcilable. PhanAnh123 (talk) 06:50, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

daging edit

Seems to be only present in Malay dialects and Javanese, is it a Javanese innovation loaned to Malay or other way around? Or do cognate words exist in other austronesian languages but not spelled the same way? Ataraxii (talk) 09:28, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A word list of languages of Central Sulawesi[14] shows several cognates, spelled there daging, dagiŋ or dagi.  --Lambiam 11:48, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You find daging all over the place in Indonesia, especially the western part. Not only on Sulawesi (where some lgs have lost the final nasal), but also in Sundanese, the Batak languages and many others. I believe that it was borrowed from Malay or Javanese into the "peripheral" languages (e.g. initial "d" is diagnostic for borrowings in many languages of Sulawesi). The direction of borrowing between Malay and Javanese is hard to tell, but we can be sure that Malay daging and Javanese daging (with dental d) are not true cognates. Malay d corresponds to Javanese r (and occasionally to retroflex d) in inherited vocabulary, while Javanese dental d correponds to Malay j [d͡ʒ]. –Austronesier (talk) 18:09, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
generally borrowing from javanese to malay whether its dental or retroflex turns to alveolar in malay, but borrowings from alveolar malay to javanese would certainly turn to dental, if it were to be "dhaging" in Javanese (retroflex d), it wouldve been easier to narrow down which origin language it came from. Ataraxii (talk) 10:01, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

対馬 edit

I’ve heard some theories that this kanji spelling may be borrowed from an intermediate stage of Chinese between Old Chinese and Middle Chinese where the final -s was still present in 對. What are other people’s takes on this? LittleWhole (talk) 10:22, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That's an interesting thought. I've never encountered that myself, but phonologically, it might hold together. (Uncertain how to account for the /b/ or /p/ reconstructed just before the /s/, though: see 對#Pronunciation...)
As Japonic, the phonology suggests 津島 (tsu shima), literally "harbor" + "island", for whatever that might be worth.  :) ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 23:32, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Known from tsunami and Hiroshima respectively. My prior was Austronesian, thus cp. *-an, Taiwan.
  • See island, literally waterworld – the Chinese etymology for 「水」(ad finis) matches approximately – dunno lol). This makes more sense to me because tsunami waves would not be limited to harbours. See perhaps तोय (toya), Telugu తోయము (tōyamu). Ma and well similar words are widely known to mean "sea", cp. 〈海島〉「海」 (cf. Kannada for "dark") and incidently "eye" in SEAsia, and "horse" as the case may be. Not to mention Semitic ayin "ة", to compare which would be like driving a camel through the eye of a needle. M is simply a common onset, very much.
By coincident I have read Wackernagel naming a peninsula-word (d...) deemed foreign to Sanskrit but I cannot find the page. dvīpá (vol. I §90, pg. 103) compares anūpa (“Teich [pond]”), cp. Ufer (“shore”) etc. etc. Cf. peninsula#Translations, insula#Translations. Given PIE *dwi- ~ *wi-, cp. (V)italia.
  • The coincidence with Thai etc. in Kra-Dai "person" vs. Chinese dao, also "big", may be remarkable in view of the above, cp. Taifun vel sim. In line with my musing about sail w.r.t. Proto-Dravidian *ten- "south" I'd look next for seamen.
-- ApisAzuli (talk) 09:02, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • @ApisAzuli, are you okay? Earnest question. The above looks very much like word salad; at any rate, I cannot understand much of what you're saying above, and what I think I might understand seems like non sequiturs unrelated to the term Tsushima in either it's spelling or phonology...  ???
Hoping you're all right, ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 18:14, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If not, it's clearly a development that's been going on for quite a while... There's been a lot of similar posts from ApisAzuli, since I've started checking out this section. Wakuran (talk) 18:57, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I've been reluctant to block someone who is not overtly harmful per se, and seems to be neurodivergent, but Apis has long (always?) posted pretty much exclusively timewasting ramblings, including previously as User:Rhyminreason, blocked for this same thing in 2020; some prior threads are linked here. I'm tempted to — indeed, I will — reinstate the block PUC imposed in May, on editing Wiktionary:-namespace pages. - -sche (discuss) 23:18, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

लक्ष् (lakṣ) edit

Given this Sanskrit root's principal meaning "to perceive or observe", is it possible that it's descended from Proto-Indo-European leǵ- ("to gather or collect")? Tocharian makes a similar semantic leap with läk- ("to gather (with the eyes); to look at, see"). Finally, a derivative of लक्ष् is लक्ष (lakṣá), which means "one hundred thousand" — a 'gathering' or 'collection' of sorts. Hdjensofjfnen (talk) 18:01, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly not related, but there's also PWG lōkōn, whence English look. Wakuran (talk) 11:19, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comparable semantic shifts are seen in Ancient Greek λέγω (légō, “gather → speak”) and Latin legō (“gather → read”).  --Lambiam 21:46, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Witness report is collected, sometimes meticuluously. There is something of a tradition about this in the Islamic tradition for example, there might be a word for that. I think we call that inquiry. See also quest, request, question, quaerō (q.v., "Uncertain" with capital U), and maybe German Quelle (“source, reference; well, resource”)?
So, in the spirit of Hinduism, the etymology is 𑀧𑀭𑁄𑀓𑁆𑀔 (parokkha)), not itself رُخش (roxš), not a redlink, but kind of paradox, logically. ApisAzuli (talk) 16:53, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Newfoundland edit

The current etymology follows WP in ascribing a Portuguese origin. This does not account for the found element in the name. It seems much more straightforward to have it be a simple compound of new + found + land. DCDuring (talk) 17:09, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Historically, “new-found land” may have been used generically for the (re)discovered North American lands.[15] Terra Nova, not only Portuguese but also Latin, the language commonly used by 16th-century cartographers, may likewise merely have been a label for these newly discovered lands.[16][17] When the label Terra Nova on a map is called “misplaced” from Newfoundland,[18] the explanation may be that the map maker did not intend the label to refer specifically to the island. To untangle the knot, we need to look for early uses of such terms that are unambiguously proper nouns for the area called Newfoundland today.  --Lambiam 21:34, 28 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ilinx edit

Coined by Roger Caillois in Les jeux et les hommes (English Man, Play and Games). From the Ancient Greek ἶλιγξ 'whirlpool'.

See http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/morph?l=i%29%3Dligc&la=greek&can=i%29%3Dligc0 Zmjezhd (talk) 13:56, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

喐 edit

To my knowledge, this is used in Cantonese in the sense of moving but not in Standard Chinese. Could it be another Cantonese word originating from Kra-Dai languages, possibly cognate with Thai โยก and Lao ໂຍກ, or perhaps with Thai ยก or ยัก? Rlsmr3139 (talk) 19:07, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Portuguese vogal edit

Hi everyone. The term vogal is currently listed as an inherited term from Latin, probably to contrast with vocal that is a clear borrowing, but I find it suspicious that such a word would be inherited (unless it was inherited through the second sense). So my question is if vogal couldn't actually be a semilearned borrowing rather an inherited term? - Sarilho1 (talk) 08:39, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There seems to be an equivalent parallel in French voyelle, so I guess it isn't impossible, considering how long Latin has been written down. Wakuran (talk) 11:14, 30 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=Wiktionary:Etymology_scriptorium/2022/June&oldid=76144954"