The redirect doesn't make sense at all, and is clearly vandalism by a currently blocked user. However, even though I'm not a Dravidianist, I question the reconstruction itself: NeitherReconstruction:Proto-Dravidian/cinkiwēr norReconstruction:Proto-South Dravidian/cinkiwēr seems to be a plausible reconstruction, given that Old Tamil𑀇𑀜𑁆𑀘𑀺𑀯𑁂𑀭𑁆(iñcivēr) seems to be a compound inside Old Tamil, and𑀇𑀜𑁆𑀘𑀺(iñci) a loanword (even if Old Tamil is apparently not the direct source of Sauraseni Prakrit𑀲𑀺𑀁𑀕𑀺𑀯𑁂𑀭(siṃgivera)). --Florian Blaschke (talk)18:03, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

According to the Proto-Germanic pages these are not related. tbf the derivation of *egalaz is phonologically uncertain.Suryaratha03 (talk)23:17, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a source, but the page for 'egel' has a more recent source which doesn't seem so sure about the connection. Kluge says the origin ofEgel is unclear.Exarchus (talk)12:02, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proto-Indo-European*h₁eǵʰis says: "Related to*h₂éngʷʰis and*h₁ógʷʰis." Seems debatable/dubious...Exarchus (talk)12:39, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Filos, a protist, is the type genus of the familyFilidae. I do not have access to the to the full original publication to know its etymology. Can you read this paper:E. Kim, E. et al?Gerardgiraud (talk)09:53, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

They write:

Etymology:Filos (m.), friend, alludes to its epibiontic relationship withApoikia;agilis, agile, refers to its swimming motion.

This is a slightly unusual Romanization of Ancient Greekφίλος(phílos).  --Lambiam08:24, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

w:Korkyra_(mythology) tells us she was the daughter ofAsopos andMetope. I analyze this asAncient Greekκόρη(kórē,“girl, maiden”) +Ancient Greekκῡρῐ́ᾱ(kūrĭ́ā,“lady”), thusyoung lady.24.108.0.4413:21, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You should obviously realise that the mythology can be invented after the island has been named. But the original name is apparentlyΚέρκυρα, which Frisk (Griechisches etymologisches Wörterbuch) relates to the Illyric demonym Κέρκυρες, but he also mentions a possible link to Latinquercus(“oak”).Exarchus (talk)14:41, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

According to Wikipedia'sCorfu article the word already occurs in Mycenaean Greek asko-ro-ku-ra-i-jo.Exarchus (talk)15:03, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Illyrian reflex ofQuercus would probably be similar toLithuanianperkūnas, soΚέρκυρες would probably be borrowed from this toponym;w:Corfu#Name tells us thatKerkyra is the Doric variant ofKorkyra. Andko-ro-ku-ra-i-jo sounds very much like a Mycenean version of κόρη-κῡρῐ́ᾱ.24.108.0.4422:27, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The source for the link to Latin 'quercus' isthis article. The explanation given of the first 'k' is assimilation to second 'k' (p.84). But this is simply one hypothesis and Chantraine calls it 'unprovable'.Exarchus (talk)23:55, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Whether Mycenaeanko-ro-ku-ra-i-jo has anything to do with the island is unclear according to 'The Mycenaean Greek Vocabulary', they also mention a possible connection to γόργυρα or Κροκύλεια. (But maybe those hypotheses are outdated?) The Mycenaean version ofκόρη(kórē) is𐀒𐀷(ko-wa/⁠kórwā⁠/), so no, it doesn't look like a version of κόρη-κῡρῐ́ᾱ in any case.Exarchus (talk)09:07, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've been making asmall list of Germanic terms found in the Latin-languageLex Frisionum compiled during the reign of Charlemagne. A few of these I am not sure how to explain, namely

• forresni(“instigation”) (apparently containingfor-)
• herthamon(“pericardium”) (containingheart)
• mithridri(“midriff”) (containingmid-)
• screona(“weaver’s hut”)
• sipido(“type of scar”)
• smelo(“upper phalanx of the thumb”)
• lito(“serf”)
• fresum(“a type of Frisian fabric”).

ᛙᛆᚱᛐᛁᚿᛌᛆᛌ ᛭Proto-Norsing ᛭Ask me anything15:38, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I might hazard a guess that -resni would include the root res- as in English rise and -ni as in the Scandinavian inchoative/ causative verb ending-na.Wakuran (talk)19:03, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That, orforresni "treason" is a derivative of Old Frisianforrēda(“to betray”), the-resni part being distantly related toOld Englishrǣs(“advice”)...Leasnam (talk)20:18, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• The others:
  • hertehama =herte +*hama "garment, covering";
  • mithridri =mid +hrithere "diaphragm";
  • screona = Old Frisianskirma(“shelter”) ? orskrīn(“shrine, chest, coffer”) ?;
  • sipido = Old Frisiansipda,spido,septa,septha(“scar”), perhaps from*saipiþu <*saipu "amber, salve", related toOld Englishsāp(“amber, resin, pomade”) ?;
  • smelo = ? perhaps fromsmel "small" ?
  • lito = ? perhaps fromlēt "half-free";
  • fresum = fromFrēs "Frisian", or perhaps related tofrēsle "curl, nap";
• Leasnam (talk)22:49, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Certain:

• herthamon ‘pericardium’ <*hertô(“heart”) +*hamô(“wrapping”).
• lito ‘serf’ <*lētaz(“id.”). Note that ⟨i⟩ represented both [i] and [e] in Late Latin spelling.

Uncertain:

• screona ‘weaver's hut’ <*skūrō(“shack”,see descendants).
• smelo ‘upper phalanx of the thumb’ <*smalaz(“small”). Cf. Old Frisiansmel(“small”) for the stressed vowel.

Nicodene (talk)22:16, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is this military?TDHoward (talk)23:19, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The US Armed Forces appear to be the origin. A former US Army officer (1988–2004) writes at Quora:^[1]

That is exactly the phrase I recall from my days in the military when there was a task that had to be done at a certain time or a place. Unless it was a true emergency, it was almost never tackled right away.

“Hurry up and wait”is military lingo.

For example, if a group of soldiers were awaiting orders from above to do just about anything, they’d be told that orders were pending and to await those orders.

Another Quora post, from a USMC nco (Force Recon-Vietnam):^[2]

The phrase,Hurry up and wait is common in all the branches. It’s almost aMantra.

 --Lambiam08:49, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

When I was a child, I heard it from my father (who was in the US Army during WWII) as a characterization of how time was spent, especially during complex operations involving multiple units.DCDuring (talk)13:11, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I first heard the expression from someone who had grown up an army brat. I wouldn't label it{{lb|en|military}}, but it does seem worth mentioning in the Etymology section that the phrase originated in the military. —Mahāgaja ·talk08:24, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• The songHurry Up and Wait doesn't use it militarilyP. Sovjunk (talk)20:16, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Stereophonics? Pitbull? It's a relatively recent song, though, so I ascribe that topoetic licence.Wakuran (talk)13:39, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think the lack of words resembling 'imut' in languages such as Malay and Javanese, added with the fact that 'imut' in Sundanese means 'to smile' (smiling does make someone look cute) would make it a Sundanese-derived Indonesian term.Udaradingin (talk)12:21, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Udaradingin: You're on the right track. In pre-1980 sources, the word doesn't show up other than in Sundanese texts. It starts to appear as a colloquial Indonesian term in the 1980s: this Google Books snippet[3] from theKamus bahasa prokem is very telling and may indicate how the semantic change has come about. –Austronesier (talk)18:04, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ぽつんつんぼ2600:387:B:3:0:0:0:4914:27, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"to attack, seize, take possession of, carry off" Might this sense not be from such a compound asin- +‎vola +‎-ō (to take in one's hand, grasp) ? If we separate the "to attack" meaning it is semantically plausible, even more so than the one we used thus far (to fly/rush in -> invade -> pillage -> seize ?).Saumache (talk)21:56, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've found this gloss by Servius on Aeneid 3.233, for what it's worth: "praedam pedibus circumvolat uncis aut circum praedam [dixit] volat uncis pedibus: aut intra volam interiorem manus amplectitur praedam: unde et 'involare' dicimus intra volam tenere, unde et pyra quaedam volema dicuntur, eo quod volam impleant." Other New Latin dictionnaries mention it but I think I'm chasing rainbows.Saumache (talk)19:11, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rfv of etymology for Spanish town, added by blocked Gfarnab.Exarchus (talk)18:16, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following page has wrong information:https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/hewers_of_wood_and_drawers_of_water#English

It states that this biblical term is first mentiioned in Joshua 9:21.Howeverm the term already appears in Deut. 29:10

Avraham Roo2A06:C701:762A:7000:F966:6AE5:71A9:3F6A13:32, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deut. 29:11 has "from the hewer of thy wood unto the drawer of thy water", so not technically the same as the English expression.Exarchus (talk)17:30, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is written that this word comes from the feminine singular past participle of the verbfuir(“to flee, to escape”). However, this inflected form is shown asfuie on this verb's entry. Confusing...OweOwnAwe (talk)15:36, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I rewrote the etymology based onTLFi.Exarchus (talk)15:53, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I find the form *fūgĭta given by the TLFi strange. (I haven't looked yet at the references it gives.) The postulated lengthening of the vowel seems unnecessary, since short u sometimes became [y] or [ɥ] before a palatal sound (e.g. Old Frenchdui from duī). I would expect the short i in -gĭta to syncopate, creating a consonant cluster which would protect the following -t-. I see that our entry forfuie actually gives its etymon as *fūgīta: I agree that a form in -īta is more likely to be the source of this form, but doesn't this contradict what the TLFi says?--Urszag (talk)15:33, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The length of the i in *fūgīta (atfuie) was changed by IP-user 81.154.157.159, so it doesn't have to mean anything.FEW actually givesfŭgĭta, with short 'u'.

Maybe the 'g' disappeared before the 'i' would have done so.Phonological history of French says about the Proto-Gallo-Ibero-Romance stage: "/j/, /dj/, /ɡj/, /ɡʲ/ have all merged as /j/ by this point."Exarchus (talk)16:27, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the length of the 'u', you also have to look at the other Romance languages and wouldn't short Vulgar Latin /u/ have given Italian 'foggire'?Exarchus (talk)17:04, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is cognate with Catalanfuita and Spanishhuida, fromfŭgĭta according to Coromines. Also participle in Spanish and Old Catalan still used in Balearic:ca:fuit.Vriullop (talk)19:25, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure if this is the right disscussion room and I don't know how to edit an article but the declension of Old Saxon "mann" is:

singularnominative: man accusative: mangentive: mannes/mannasdative: manne/manplural:nominative: man accusative: mangenitive: manno dative: mannun/ mannon

source: "§202. Declination. conson. stämme." p.72 of "SAMMLUNG KURZER GRAMMATIKEN GERMANISCHER DIALEKTE. HERAUSGEGEBEN VON WILHELM BRAUNE"202.71.151.416:59, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shouldn't the dictionary form be "man" if it is the singular nominative?Wakuran (talk)20:23, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the nominative singular could also bemann (e.g. uuas thar ên gigamalodmann that uuas fruod gomo)Leasnam (talk)20:33, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What is the reason for reconstructing this as anōn-stem? Pinging @Leasnam who created it. —2600:4808:9C31:4800:411A:E5C7:9C89:9AF002:43, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I believe I did because it was presented as such [here]. Why [the] Koebler [website]reconstructs it shows a reconstruction as an n-stem, I have no clue.Leasnam (talk)02:50, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Köbler doesnt reconstruct anything. The man is mainly a legal expert and started this comprehensive dictionary to contain all important works. For that particular entry he cites Pokorny: click on an entry to view more details.Imbricitor (talk)21:39, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It does strike me as odd, since the West Germanic counterparts are strong o-stems, and West Germanic and Gothic tend to agree in keeping PGmc strong o-stems as such.Leasnam (talk)20:50, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This word, when only looking at its morpho-semantical origin, could likely mean "perished". However its meaning really is "destructive". This has been explained by bringing up the curse ὄλοιο/ὄλοιτο "may you perish/may it perish". But I can't see how this is a sufficient explanation. A thing that should perish is not necessarily something destructive, and even less in the context we are given in the Iliad. Sure, when you know something is destructive or will bring ruin, you might wish for it to perish - but this doubling up on the "destruction"-notion seems to be illogical. Instead, it could simply be a special usage of the middle participle with an active meaning. We know a similar case, inversely, from the active perfect ὀλωλέναι "to have perished" where a middle form would be expected. Does anyone know more about this?Imbricitor (talk)15:06, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia has an article ondeponent verb, perhaps relevant.Wakuran (talk)16:01, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Beekes might be saying "-έω ~ -άω" and "-ή ~ -έω", not "+ -έω". The problem is that future κᾰλέω/κᾰλέσω and aorist ἐκᾰ́λεσᾰ have short ε while-έω gives a long η future -ήσω and aorist -ησᾰ. Similar problems affectτελέω andζέω. Perhaps the page-έω needs to be edited?172.97.141.21916:11, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure ῥέω or ζέω should be mentioned at -έω, as those verbs aren't ῥ/ζ + -έω.Exarchus (talk)22:47, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aboutκαλέω: LIV gives this as*kl̥h₁- +-éye-, so with a different suffix than for causative verbs. I'm going to add that one to the*-éyeti page.Exarchus (talk)10:09, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reconstruction:Proto-Indo-European/h₂werg- says it is associated withἐέργω, whereas the latter is linked toἔργω, which says it is in turn fromReconstruction:Proto-Indo-European/h₁wreǵ-. Further clarification is needed.Σ>―(〃°ω°〃)♡→L.C.D.（-{に〇〇する}-）17:06, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Which sense ofdraw doesdogdraw derive from?P. Sovjunk (talk)20:11, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Verb) 4.To move, travel, approach.> 4. (hunting, now rare) To search for game; to track a quarry. [from 16th c.]Chuck Entz (talk)23:10, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Malayalam etymology says it comes from Sanskritसरक(saraka), but the Tamil cognateசாராயம்(cārāyam) has it coming from Sanskritसार(sāra,“nectar, juice”). Pinging @Vis M.Exarchus (talk)21:18, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This entry (for both Afrikaans and Dutch) claims that the two different meanings have different etymologies but the given "etymology" (which only goes back to Middle Dutch) is identical. But the Dutch WTnl:kuit gives both meanings for its etymology 1. (Its etymology 2 is a different word - a kind of beer - which is not mentioned in our article.) The Dutch page also has several references, where we have none. Shall I just go ahead an attempt to update our entry from the information in the Dutch item?ColinFine (talk)19:31, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Middle Dutch could be two different words, so that alone means little. But all of the dictionaries at etymologiebank.nl do agree that it's most likely one and the same. So I've merged them into one etymology with two noun entries. I've not done anything about the beer sense, because I don't know that word.2.203.201.4120:02, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

THank you. That's much better (you've even added some etymology).ColinFine (talk)22:42, 14 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is there actually a source for indicating the sense "fish eggs" as masculine?Van Dale gives "v(m)". The gender in Middle Dutch wasapparently "m., o."

The word is mostly used without article, so I personally couldn't tell what the gender is without looking it up.Exarchus (talk)17:37, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

TheWoordenboek der Nederlandsche Taal gives(v.) for either of the two,^[4][5] as well as for the third, obsolete “beer” sense.^[6]  --Lambiam20:06, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'd change it to feminine then. But 'het kuit' is also used (though a lot less frequently), shouldn't this be added too?Exarchus (talk)21:27, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

InhetGroene Boekje and other dictionaries I could consult, it is strictly ade word in all senses. I bethet kuit is hardly ever used in the anatomical sense – zero ghits forpijn in het kuit en precisely one forkramp in het kuit against a gazillion forkramp in de kuit. We could either ignore the anomalous use ofhet for the “roe” sense, or mention it in a Usage note while noting that this gender reassignment has not been sanctioned by dictionaries.  --Lambiam21:02, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was certainly not suggesting giving the anatomical sense as optionally neuter. But I'm not surprised some people usehet for the "roe" sense, given that it isn't a very common term (except in the expressionkuitschieten, and also apparentlyhom of kuit in the Netherlands) and having an uncountable noun as neuter isn't unusual (het zand, het water, het gras,...). Association withhet zaad seems also possible.Exarchus (talk)21:22, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I edited the article (also removing the diminutive), feel free to improve.

Unrelatedly I noticed that many articles are not following theguidelines for Dutch gender, as atbarkrukm orf.Exarchus (talk)23:48, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The “fier” portion points to Latin “ferus”. Should be to Latin “fido”, no?Unless it’s wild to trust ;-)TLauckBenson (talk)18:03, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

fier#French lists both senses, unless this is some kind of joke.Wakuran (talk)21:08, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On the other hand, I see that Latinferus lists French fer as a descendant instead of fier, which I remember was due to some technical issue.Wakuran (talk)21:28, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your clarification.TLauckBenson (talk)04:13, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely technical issues. Now that I've added 'fier' as alternative form for etymology 2 atfer, it is also shown at Latin 'ferrum'.Exarchus (talk)13:55, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Exarchus @Caoimhin ceallach I couldn't find any evidence or scholarship that reconstructs an asigmatic athematic root noun for the descendants. The declension table even used to have an s-suffix untilVictar removed the s-suffix in 2018, a change whose rationale I cannot figure out. Should we restore the s-suffix to this word? —Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung,mellohi! (投稿)22:13, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Martirosyan thinks the formation is similar to*néh₂s and the derived terms imply an -s, so ...

It's a bit funny how all of h₁/₂/₃/₄ have been reconstructed here. Maybe *H- would be the most honest option.Exarchus (talk)22:37, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's especially notable that Martirosyan doesn't even mention a root noun. Since all descendants ares-stems of some sort, I don't see how PIE could have been anything else. Though what type ofs-stem is of course a more difficult question. —Caoimhin ceallach (talk)23:05, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any source for these accents? The *upo page wasmoved to *upó with argumentation "With h₂epó, pró..." For *h₂epo, Beekes actually reconstructs *h₂épo (at ἀπό). And then the accent at Sanskritअप-(apa-) was idiotically changed from 'ápa' to 'apá'here and (after being corrected) againhere to conform to the reconstruction.Exarchus (talk)22:36, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently, Andrew Byrd gives */apó/ as alternative for */h₂epó/ at p.8 ofThe Indo-European Syllable, though without talking about the accent.Exarchus (talk)19:48, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I belatedly found a relevant discussion of this in Ringe'sFrom Proto-Indo-European to Proto-Germanic on p.104 (footnote).Exarchus (talk)19:14, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.Duchuyfootball (talk)13:49, 17 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Plausiblyborrowed fromItalianimpavesare.  --Lambiam13:41, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!Duchuyfootball (talk)03:27, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pannonian Rusyn has two words for "tea",тея(teja) andчай(čaj). Obviously, the first one comes from Hokkien and the second one from non-Hokkien Sinitic. But it's the same character, 茶. Are they (the Pannonian terms) technically doublets?Insaneguy1083 (talk)00:49, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say so, and likewise for any language with both a word from the "tea" family and a word from the "cha(i)" family, since both families descend from the same Old Chinese word. —Mahāgaja ·talk09:39, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RFV of the etymology. Is it not simply王八 (wángba, “bastard”) +蛋 (dàn, “suffix denoting “person of certain characteristics”, usually with a pejorative tone”)? "王 + numeral" for a person of certain characteristics, e.g.黃六／黄六 (written as 王六 in the Song dynasty work 夢梁錄) and王老五, is typical in Chinese anyway.RcAlex36 (talk)02:21, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I changed this from "oligarchy" to "oligarch" because it doesn't appear to mean "oligarchy" based on the original Etymology, and based on the wikipedia entry. But, also, does this word really come fromолигархи, and notолигарх?Kiril kovachev (talk・contribs)03:36, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know much about how Russian gets adapted to Japanese, butолигарх(oligarx) →オリガルヒ(origaruhi) seems eminently possible since ヒ is pronounced[çi] and consonants have to be followed by a vowel in Japanese (with a few exceptions not relevant here). —Mahāgaja ·talk09:34, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Some transliterations of a final ⟨х⟩:

• Вах(Vax) →ヴァフ(vafu).^[7]
• Сандармох(Sandarmox) →サンダルモフ(sandarumofu).^[8]
• Черных(Černyx) →チェルヌィフ(cheru'nwifu)^[9]

But:

• Генрих(Genrix) →ゲンリク(genriku).^[10]

 --Lambiam12:54, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Final х → フ is interesting, especially since the transliteration of the German nameBach (as in Johann Sebastian) isバッハ(Bahha). I always assumed thata was chosen as the support vowel precisely to avoid having an f-like sound trying to match a/x/. —Mahāgaja ·talk15:28, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Mahagaja In German loanwords/names /x/ generally becomes /hhV/, with the vowel matching whatever vowel comes previously, whereas /ç/ tends to just be represented with ヒ. I'm not sure why German /x/ becomes geminated but not Russian /x/, or why Russian /x/ generally defaults to フ without matching the prior vowel, but either way there's no avoidance to using フ for /x/

German examples:

• Bach /bax/ >バッハ(bahha)
• Bruch /bʁʊx/ >ブルッフ(buruffu)
• Koch /kɔx/ >コッホ(kohho)
• Friedrich /fʁiːdʁɪç/ >フリードリヒ(furīdorihi)
• Lech /lɛç/ >レヒ川(がわ)(rehigawa)

Horse Battery (talk)21:26, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Looking into it a bit more, the gemination appears to merely represent the short vowel, as with English loanwords, with vowel lengthening representing long vowels:Buchholtz /buːxhɔlt͡s/ >ブーフホルツ(būfuhorutsu)Horse Battery (talk)21:50, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Lambiam That's quite persuasive, because it seems to show that ひ coming from final х isn't usual at all. Before reading this I thought exactly as @Mahagaja's first reply. How did you come up with these examples, and are there any where the sound chosen is ひ? It would be most helpful if we had a source that would weigh in, but no dictionary I have has this word.Kiril kovachev (talk・contribs)18:26, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On the English Wikipedia I went through various lists of Russian geographical features, novelists and artists, seeking names ending on ⟨kh⟩, verifying they ended on ⟨х⟩ in Russian, and finally trying to find a Japanese article on the topic. (The final bit was the easy part.)  --Lambiam20:12, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Daijisen says that it is borrowed from Russianолига́рх (oligárx).[11]Helloworld6666 (talk)09:31, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So I was following the etymology ofbagatelle, which unsurpisingly comes from French, which comes from Italianbagattella.

On bagattella, it gives the etymology as "From Late Latinbaga, from Latinbaca. But on the page for "baga", it says it comes not from "baca" but fromMiddle Englishbagge, which just means bag. Which all told suggests the word went from Middle English to Latin to Italian to French to (modern) English. Which seems a little improbable. Also the the definitions "trifle" and "bag" is a bit of a stretch. If instead we go to "baca" we find it means "small fruit, berry; pearl; bead", which is a better semantic match.

In short: the etymology for Italianbagattella points to Late Latinbaga, which seems questionable. Possibly there is an additional sense of "baga" that is missing here.

98.110.52.16908:40, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Etymonline says, "perhaps a diminutive of Latinbaca(“berry”), or from one of the continental words (such as Old Frenchbague(“bundle”)) from the same source as Englishbag(n.)", so apparently it might be either one. 'Bag' → 'trifle' on its own might be a stretch, but rememberbagattella is a diminutive, and 'small bag' → 'trifle' isn't such a stretch after all. —Mahāgaja ·talk09:27, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pianigiani’s etymological dictionary^[12] gives as the primary derivation Latinbaga, glossed asfardello,roba, but mentions that Schuchardt compares it tobagattino (a small coin^[13]) and derives it frombaca; also, Littrè is mentioned as saying that the word was used in a 15th-century text in the sense of circle, ring, suggesting a relation with Low Latinbauga(“bracelet”).  --Lambiam12:12, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Low Latinbauga(“bracelet”) seems to be a Germanc borrowing as well, aking to Old Norsebaugr (bracelet, ring).Wakuran (talk)12:40, 18 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Coromines^[14] notes the old Italian sense both as trifle andsleight of hand. Apart from Schuchardt'sbaca, he suggests some Franco-Provençal form akin to Old Occitanbagastel and Old Frenchbaastel (sleight of hand).Vriullop (talk)08:10, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently,baastel is related to Latinbastum, from what I can see.Wakuran (talk)12:05, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In particular, I've made edits in고슴도치 and셤. Particular about the etymology. I've used textual evidence from Ancient Chinese sources. But I don't know the format of this website. Can you guys help me clean up the page please? Thank you!Blahhmosh (talk)18:11, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I want to ask. In the same page in <使高麗錄> there is a line saying "麗人謂笠為「軋」", meaning that "Koreans pronounce '笠' (the stereotypical Asian straw conical hat) as '軋'". I've taken a look one of the Middle Chinese/Dialectal pronunciation of 軋, and it is roughly (gat), and is pronunced very similarly to "갓" (gat), the native Korean word for that stereotypical Korean black hat. What do you think?Blahhmosh (talk)18:28, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Blahhmosh Your edits look good to me. It would maybe be helpful to include a transcription of the document/book titles, however (in parentheses following the title).Andrew Sheedy (talk)22:58, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think so, if you look at other entries in Wiktionary that talk about Late Old Korean origins of words such as비#Etymology_1, you'd see that it's much more formatted. I want my entries to be as formatted like the one in the example. @Andrew Sheedy

And I already did include the name of the document as a source.Blahhmosh (talk)23:08, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Blahhmosh The best thing to do would be to take a look at the page for the template that is used. I'm not familiar with it, because I don't edit Korean, but it's explained atTemplate:ko-etym-native. If you can't figure that out, then take a look at how the titles are formatted in that entry (and earlier in the etymology of고슴도치). That's what I was talking about (although now I realize that the standard is to put the original script in parentheses, not the transcription). So put "First attested inTranscription of title in italics (Korean script name in parentheses), year, asOld/Middle Korean [term]." Someone else who knows more can then templatize it.Andrew Sheedy (talk)02:54, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I assume you can look at the source of a page you want to emulate, and then copy/ paste the format with replaced word entries.Wakuran (talk)16:05, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For most things, yes, but the template he/she is trying to copy is not at all intuitive, IMO.Andrew Sheedy (talk)02:29, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Given the ultimate origin of the name is hypothesized to be Indo-European, it's suspicious to see the Latin word marked as a borrowing from Etruscan (rather than the reverse). Does any reliable source actually say this? De Vaan treats it as a native Latin form, only mentioning Etruscan as a means of dating the Latin sound change -sv- > -rv-: "Since the deityMenerva is attested in Etruscan from the sixth c. onwards, the sound law must have taken place before that time" (page 381).Urszag (talk)21:00, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That part of the etymology hasn't changed since 2011. It seems to be based an a misunderstanding of De Vaan. The etymology seems decent, but the nature of Etruscan makes it so that if the word was actually Etruscan in origin, it is near-impossible to prove. —Caoimhin ceallach (talk)23:36, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The page for*ménos has Minerva coming from Proto-Italic *menezwā. I suppose Etruscan𐌌𐌄𐌍𐌄𐌓𐌅𐌀(menerva) is to be added there, possibly as borrowing from the also to be added "VOLat.menrva, menerva" given by de Vaan.Exarchus (talk)22:46, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can VOLmenrva be the result of Latin-internal processes? I thought that kind of syncope was specifically Etruscan. —Caoimhin ceallach (talk)23:30, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think Etruscan is required to explain that form. The development of forms like *agros >ager or *tris >ter is usually understood as implying that Latin at some point had a syllabic rhotic that was later resolved to /er/. Lindsay in "The Latin Language" says "There are some indications that vocalic l and r were sounds not unknown to the Italic languages down to a fairly late period, g. Marrucinian pacrsi [...] Sabine Atrno [...] though how far these are merely graphic is hard to decide" (pages 278-279). Early Latin seems to have sometimes used alphabet letters as signs for their names, e.g. Lindsay says "Terentius Scaurus, second cent. A. D. (p. 15 K.) tells us that the letter K was called ka, while the name of C was ce, and that these letters themselves had been before his time used to indicate the syllables represented by their names, e.g. krus (for ka-rus), cra (for cera)" (p.6). Sinceer is supposed to have been the name of the letter R, it seems possible to me that menrva could be just a defective spelling of /menerwa/.--Urszag (talk)23:55, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've edited the Latin etymology + the*ménos page.Exarchus (talk)19:13, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gunter Grass (The Dog Years, p. 5) gives this as Danzig dialect forstone. I can't find anything in German or Polish (or similar languages) to suggest an etymology, so my best guess is that it is imitative of stones clattering against each other. Anyone have any better ideas? (The only Kashubian word I could find,cela (calf), doesn't fit at all).24.108.0.4403:09, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Looking through Deutsches Wörterbuch, I came across the German wordZellenkalk (Cellular dolomite), but it might not be that great a suggestion.Wakuran (talk)19:26, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Some sources (e.g.Derksen 2008, p. 557f;Orel 2003, p. 160f) claim that this word must reflect*gelþ- instead of*geld-, even though Old Norsegjalda(id.) is securely attested, and therefore it alters the whole Indo-European etymology to preclude a reconstruction*gʰeldʰ-, instead requiring*gʰelt-. This seems silly to me, even just focusing on the Old Swedish etymology from Old Norse: the word is also attested with the spellingsgiælda,gialda,giælla, andgælla (and at this point I'm not suregjalla is even one of them). Kroonen, a Germanic specialist, makes no mention of the problem. Can any experts weigh in on this? —2600:4808:9C31:4800:20CB:C23:5C50:263B04:21, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

-ld- >-ll- is regular in Swedish. CompareSwedishhålla withIcelandichalda.ᛙᛆᚱᛐᛁᚿᛌᛆᛌ ᛭Proto-Norsing ᛭Ask me anything21:09, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Having the Swedish doubletsgälda andgälla might seem strange, but the former might have been influenced by Middle Low Germangelden and the Swedish noungäld.Wakuran (talk)22:57, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vannella (protist) is the type genus of the familyVannellidae, but I have not been able to find its etymology. Any ideas?Gerardgiraud (talk)15:24, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A guess: Latinvannus(“winnowing basket”) +‎-ella. Bovee may have preferred the feminine gender to leave the epithets of species transferred from the genusFlabellula, such asF. crassa, invariant under the reclassification.  --Lambiam18:51, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I see now this is also the etymology given for the species nameVanellus, which seems to have lost onen in the process of suffixation.  --Lambiam18:57, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's a good idea, thank you.Gerardgiraud (talk)22:24, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Dutch is from Romani. Regarding the further origin, the Romani entry derives it from Sanskritजकुट(jakuṭa) with sources, while the Dutch entry derives it from Arabicجاهِل(jāhil,“ignorant”) without sources. My requests would be: 1.) the Sanskrit should be glossed; 2.) it should be checked whether the Arabic derivation has merit as an alternative theory; 3.) the etymology sections should be brought in line accordingly.92.73.31.11321:19, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There's also Swedishjycke, likely from the same Romani word.Wakuran (talk)22:50, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

the Sanskrit means "dog", seems clearly a more likely source than the ArabicExarchus (talk)13:14, 24 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks! So I'll just adapt the Dutch etymology. If we ever find a source that somehow corroborates the Arabic theory, we can still bring it back.92.73.31.11304:18, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, Dutch historical linguist Hans Beelen and etymologist Nicoline van der Sijs agree with the Romani theory, not even mentioning any other.^[15]  --Lambiam12:18, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As stated above, the question was not about the Romani origin of the Dutch word, but about the further origin of the Romani word.92.73.31.11319:01, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

From Xhosa?Tollef Salemann (talk)02:14, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would assume not. Initial g- pronounced gutturally looks very Afrikaans. Seems to be an Afrikaans word for "boondocks" or similar. At most, it might be an Afrikaans reinterpretation of a native African word, I guess. I'm not entirely sure on what its Afrikaans origin would be, but the part 'doel' could possibly mean "destination".Wakuran (talk)00:02, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The ⟨oe⟩ strongly points to borrowing from Afrikaans, in which the term is easily attested. But it is not among the estimated 95% of Afrikaans words that are inherited from Dutch. The Afrikaans pronunciation is probably/χra.maˈdu.la/. An Afrikaans word with initial[χ] not from Dutch isgogga, said to be borrowed from aKhoe language.  --Lambiam12:57, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly from Dutch "Spaansche mat"?Udaradingin (talk)09:08, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nederlandse woorden wereldwijd has this:

Spaanse mat ‘Spaanse zilveren munt’ →indonesischpasmat ‘Spaans zilveren muntstuk’;ambons-maleisspānsmat ‘rijksdaalder’;javaanssepasmat ‘Spaanse zilveren munt; rijksdaalder’;kupang-maleisspansemat ‘geldstuk’;menadoneesspansemat ‘geldstuk’;soendaneespasmat ‘rijksdaalder’;ternataans-maleisspansemat ‘geldstuk’;creools-portugees (batavia)spansmat ‘rijksdaalder’.

Note that arijksdaalder is not the same as a Spanish dollar. The text “het Holl. Spaansche mat” in the entryPASMAT in the Soendaneesch-Hollandsch Woordenboek is meant to give the etymology, not the meaning. This is obvious in the entryKOEMPĔNI, where “idem” can only mean that the Sundanese meaning is that of the immediately preceding Dutch etymon.

 --Lambiam11:18, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like the initials was dropped through metanalysis ofspasmat as =se- +pasmat. –Austronesier (talk)16:33, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

River in Yorkshire, no etymology given. I refer to Irishdearna, Welshdarn,piece, fragment, palm of the hand...it seems the most likely explanation. I am also looking atFindhorn -d is intrusive, and wikipedia examines - sceptically - the idea that it derives from Fionn-eireann, although this does not make much sense. I suggest this might beFionn-dhearna (with thedh soft or silent), in which case it would be similar to the Yorkshire Dearne. Thoughts?24.108.0.4405:11, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've added an etymology to the page which traces it back toDirna (AD 1155), and added two possible theories. Please feel free to elaborate as needed.Leasnam (talk)17:37, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your explanation ofDearne is better than mine. But I am still interested in Findhorn etc., so I will pursue my suggestions.24.108.0.4403:28, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tagged but not listed.
Namedsallfly due to confusion with the somewhat similar lookingsawfly ?Leasnam (talk)21:07, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The etymology of the heraldic sense is clearly more than just "From Latin palla". Collins says it's from Middle Englishpalet, from Middle Frenchpalet, frompal, but I'm having a hard time finding either the (relevant) Middle English word in dictionaries or in use (there are of course many other Middle English words spelledpalet) or the relevant Middle French word.- -sche(discuss)22:21, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The protistGocevia is the type genus of the familyGoceviidae. I haven't found the etymology. Any ideas?Gerardgiraud (talk)08:02, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Probably named after a scientist named Gocev orGochev or something like that. —Mahāgaja ·talk16:23, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A good idea but difficult to know who this Gocev or Gochev (Bulgarian surname) is, isn't it?Gerardgiraud (talk)18:16, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A plausible guess is Petyr (or Petar) Gochev;[16].Wakuran (talk)23:53, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Gerardgiraud: Wikispecies has the genus in a category of "Eponyms of Petar Velikov Gočev". If you go tothe page for the type species, it has a a reference listing the page number, and a link to a PDF of the original article. On the last paragraph of that page it says:

Това ми даба основание да създамъ отъ него новъ родъ,

нареченъ на името на моя приятелъ, геолога П. Гочевъ -

Gočevia pontica n.g. n.sp.

Which Google Translate quite plausibly renders as:

This gives me reason to create a new genus from it,

named after my friend, the geologist P. Gočev -

Gočevia pontica n.g. n.sp.

The haček was no doubt removed due to the restrictions of the taxonomic code, but it does explain why it'sGocevia rather thanGochevia, which would be a more logical romanization.Chuck Entz (talk)01:27, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It may be a "logical" romanization from Cyrillic to English, but it does not compute for romanization from Cyrillic to Latin and many other languages written with the Latin alphabet, such as Czech, German, Italian, Irish, Lithuanian, Polish and Turkish.  --Lambiam10:34, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gocevia is pretty logical for Latin. Although Classical Latin doesn't have a/t͡ʃ/ phoneme, Ecclesiastical Latin does, andGocevia would be pronounced/ɡɔˈt͡ʃɛvia/ in that variety. Note also that Czechia is calledCechia in New Latin. —Mahāgaja ·talk19:01, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Does there exist / did there use to exist some*що́йний(*ščójnyj)? If not, where does this come from? Perhaps linked toщо(ščo)?Insaneguy1083 (talk)16:09, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've added etymological info from{{R:uk:ESUM}}.Voltaigne (talk)01:52, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Should this be*glāʀōn or*glaʀōn ? If*glāʀōn then there are difficulties with Middle English as one would expectgloren orglerenLeasnam (talk)19:57, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

etymologiebank.nl says the (Middle) English comes from (Middle) DutchExarchus (talk)15:49, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

From what I understand, Orel simply has MLG 'glāren' as descendant of his reconstruction*ʒlēsjanan. Is there a reason why this wouldn't work?

Notice that MLG hasglār ("resin") from < *glēza- according to Kroonen, so maybe there was a *glēzijaną variant...Exarchus (talk)16:59, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm having doubts about*glēsijaną, which I have mentioned on the talk page [here]. And if Old Norseglæsa has a different origin, then*glēsijaną goes bye-bye. The Middle Low German for "resin" also has a variant that's short,glar, and a denominalglarren(“to apply resin to, smear with a sticky substance”), which also shows a short vowel.Leasnam (talk)19:45, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure which the most active thread, but I createdRC:Proto-Indo-European/ǵʰleh₁-. --{{victar|talk}}07:43, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Related to the above, I would like to know what others think of Old Englishglær(“amber”), and whether the vowel should be long or short. In the past, I set up the OE entry to show both a long and short vowel [here], but recently I decided it was short as most credible resources show it asglær.

Now that Proto-Germanic*glēsijaną is again a thing in my book, this re-opens the door to the possibility thatglær could beglǣr. Indeed,Old Saxonglēr(“resin”), if a cognate, supports this. However, the only way I see to reconcileglǣr andglēr is if they come fromProto-West Germanic*glairi or*glaiʀi (unless this is a shared borrowing from another language). Then there is the Late Latinglaesum, which shows a long vowel/diphthong. A while ago, Icreated added to*glēzô to connect these. Does anyone have any advice on how to straighten out this mess ?Leasnam (talk)03:43, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kroonen gives OEglǣr at *glasa- ~ *glaza- and derives it from *glēza-Exarchus (talk)10:39, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Einführung in das Altsächsische mentions (p.23) that in some words, Proto-Germanic *ē¹ resulted in ē, withgēr as example. It doesn't seem too far-fetched thatglēr might be another one...Exarchus (talk)11:22, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

About Latin:Lewis & Short give Tacitus and Plinius usingglaesum so the indication 'Medieval Latin' at*glēzô is wrong (and the borrowing from Frankish too)

To be precise: Pliny uses "glaesum" and Tacitus "glesum".Exarchus (talk)14:36, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Right, it should be from PGmc. Fixed. Is it "glesum" or "glēsum" ?Leasnam (talk)18:45, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's 'glēsum', but obviously written 'glesum'. But I don't think Pliny the Elder nor Tacitus are 'Late Latin' either.Exarchus (talk)18:58, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure either why the Gmc reconstruction is an n-stem (as per Pokorny). I favour moving it to a neuter a-stem. Any objections ?Leasnam (talk)19:06, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My only objection would be that the word is indicated as masculine in Old English by Kroonen, but I see you changed the gender there, are other sources saying something else?Exarchus (talk)19:28, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently the original Bosworth Toller's dictionary indicates it as neuter but the1921 supplement corrects this to masculine (incorporatedhere).

But I don't know how accurately Old English reflects the Proto-Germanic gender.Exarchus (talk)20:13, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is not uncommon for neuter nouns in PGmc to shift to masculine in West GermanicLeasnam (talk)20:59, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Latin byformglessum correlates too neatly withProto-Germanic*glasą. Can anyone help rule out the possibility that it may have gone fromglessum >glēsum ? or is the inverse the more likely event ?Leasnam (talk)21:04, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An obvious question is when did each form first occur.Du Cange quotes Pliny as using "glessum", while more recent editions have "glaesum". So maybe "glessum" is nowadays considered a scribal error when it comes to Pliny. Is there any 20th century Latin dictionary giving "glessum"? Because for some reason, Short's 1891Elementary Latin Dictionary has omitted "glessum" compared to the 1879Lewis & Short edition.Gaffiot doesn't mention it.Exarchus (talk)22:01, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What happened to the <n>? I thought it could only be lost next to consonants and not between vowels. Surface analysis givesco- notcon-.172.97.141.21904:40, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Usage notes forcon- say: "Before vowels and h, the prefix becomes co-, or rarely com-."Exarchus (talk)09:18, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oops I misremembered. I mixed Latin rules up with English rules that distinguish co-/con- and retain the <n>.172.97.141.21909:42, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Noticed this word looks and sounds an awful lot like the old Englishcwalu and was wondering if there's an etymological link anywhere or if it's just coincidence?Chwalu doesn't have any etymology listed at all for context which is unfortunately somewhat common for Welsh words.2A00:23C7:7C04:2601:6029:60FF:FE7D:FAB623:35, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I guess not, as Welsh chw- apparently is derived from Proto-Celtic s(w)- and Old English cw- from Proto-Germanic k(w)-. The phonetics don't match up. It might possibly be a borrowing in some direction, but I am inclined to believe it is just a coincidence.Wakuran (talk)23:55, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User barely speaks English, is highly creative with etymologies, and seems to mix up Nôm spellings with etymologies. Maybe someone with better command of Chinese and/or etymologies can save some of these, but otherwise they should just be deleted.MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk)02:41, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

忍牙 → unhurried, leisurely

赦蜃 → relaxed, with infinite wander

忱 → in a whispery, breathy, or hushed voice; in secret; secretly

洵荒 → unlocked and wide open

局冪 → dull-witted; stupid; clumsy; foolish

吝憚 → beset with difficulties; unsuccessful; ill-starred

攏凍 → filled with hardship and misfortune

劣 or 裂 → paralyzed

There’s probably more.MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk)02:41, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

吼嚇 → overbearing; domineering.MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk)03:03, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I’m just going to delete them all. Thank you for reading (assuming you read ☺).MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk)01:47, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

CouldMiddle Englishgloren("to shine, gleam, glow; glisten"; whence modernEnglishglore,gloar(“to gaze, stare, shine, glow”)) be fromOld English*glārian (further fromProto-West Germanic*glāʀōn) ? The word has counterparts inWest Frisiangloarje,Dutchgloren,Low Germangloren,Norwegian Nynorskglora,Swedishglora but the Middle English seems to be the earliest attested, and I'm thinking may be the source of all the others. A few sources cite a rareMiddle Dutchgloren, but I haven't been able to find it. Other sources say the word is older and hails fromProto-Germanic*gluz-, but the early evidence is wanting.Leasnam (talk)04:54, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see how it would be possible. Proto-West-Germanic *ā regularly became West Saxon *ǣ/Anglian *ē unless it was followed by a nasal, right?--Urszag (talk)06:02, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I can think of a few exceptions:Old Englishslāpan, a variant ofslǣpan, which does show the change you mention; plusblāwan fromProto-West Germanic*blāan;sāwan fromProto-West Germanic*sāan;Old Englishcrāwe fromProto-West Germanic*krāā; etc.Leasnam (talk)06:21, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I wasn't familiar with those. Ringe and Taylor 2014 says the lack of fronting before *w (unless followed by a high front vowel) is a regular exception (page 146), and that West Saxon *ǣ was probably regularly retracted to -ā- before a single consonant (other than a non-coronal obstruent) + back vowel (page 199-200). So a West Saxon *glārian seems possible after all, although I'm not sure how many such forms survived into Middle English.--Urszag (talk)06:49, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I dare to conjecture thatMiddle Englishglaren andgloren may actually be the same word...Leasnam (talk)06:53, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I createdRC:Proto-West Germanic/glōrōn. --{{victar|talk}}07:35, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Wiktionary-namespace discussion pages