text:
Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2021/July

paydos
The etymology of (“work break”, possibly “the break at the end of a day of work”) is currently given as: “Borrowed from ”. This seems problematic for several reasons. First, it is somewhat unlikely that the noun comes from the (first person singular present tense) lemma form of a verb. There is no Turkish suffix *-dos. If the donor is Greek, it should be another term, presumably a noun, that is etymologically related to the verb παύω and that is phonetically reasonably close to. But no candidate presents itself. The in the Turkish is also by itself problematic. The diphthong <αυ> should give rise to or, or, before a voiceless consonant,.

Nişanyan offers the etymon φαγητός, referring to a (misspelled) term φάγετος meaning “meal-time” found in the 1891 Redhouse. This too appears problematic. The first problem is that, as far as I can see, the form *φαγητός with a final sigma is not attested. , a neuter noun, is reported to come from the Medieval Greek noun. So the final ⟨s⟩ of the Turkish term is unexplained. Worse, by the time the Turks arrived on the scene, the pronunciation of ⟨φ⟩ had changed from the aspirated plosive to the fricative. In other Turkish terms borrowed or derived from Greek, e.g. <  and  <, we find an. Although <  suggests that under certain (which?) conditions  <  is possible, the Wikipedia article claims a Byzantine Greek intermediate  (see also ).

Any suggestions? --Lambiam 01:16, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
 * The first one which Nişanyan mentioned,  says that no other is possible: It is the imperative of  + . After all is given as a variant and not as an etymology in, as well as in   and one uses it according to both, a part left out by Nişanyan, with , although this not uncommonly derives later, so according to this originally someone said “chill, homie”, somebody answered with a light verb that he or someone else “did a chill, homie”, next this was interpreted as a noun. Vahagn Petrosyan created the Ottoman without etymology and promised us to tell us more while I was writing. Well see what it is more. The Greek clearly isn’t it; it was a user who just came here adding lots of Greek etymologies of which many weren’t true so then I have cleaned up the bulk. Fay Freak (talk) 19:48, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
 * — Thanks. I have replaced the etymology by the essence of the etymology provided in the meantime by Vahag at the new Ottoman entry. --Lambiam 20:16, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
 * As I said, he created it without etymology, so I provided it; I don’t know if he wanted to write something else (more obscure), but I guess if you find it so convincing that you copy it over it may be just that. Fay Freak (talk) 20:22, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
 * The undoubtedly correct etymology was provided by Fay Freak. It is corroborated by the Armenian and Kurdish forms ending in -t. I only added the descendants and some additional sources. --Vahag (talk) 15:12, 2 July 2021 (UTC)

I think these words are homologous because they have the same meanings. But it is argued that I cannot cite EDAL as a source. I don't have any other source than that and unfortunately I can't find any. But I think it's related because the verb means either to soak or to suck in all five language families, and all its proto forms are almost the same structure. Please take a look at the page and comment if is related to, if this is one of interesting altaic words. :) (I do not claim that Altaic is a language.) Thanks.

 * It looks like ←  are not at all related to .  Modern Japanese shimiru comes from Classical and Old Japanese simu, which has a similar phonetic shape as  -- however, the semantics are all wrong.  Old Japanese simu ("to soak; to dye, to be dyed; to permeate, be permeated") is homophonous with simu ("to close something, to become closed; to finalize, to finish").  Cognacy is a definite possibility for these two Old Japanese verbs.  At any rate, neither seems all that close to senses of "to suck, to swallow", which instead would be expressed by Old Japanese verbs supu ("to suck in") or nomu ("to drink; to swallow").
 * I am not immediately familiar with what EDAL is, but from your link above other threads, I think I understand it to be the Starling Altaic etymological database. Their coverage of Japanese is ... awful, frankly.  They uncover a few interesting things here and there, but basically by accident.  Many of their etymologies are just woefully wrong.  Take Japanese ato ("after; behind"), for instance -- the related Starling entry associates this rather wildly with many different language families, oblivious to the internal Japanese etymology that traces this term to a compound of a- ("foot") + to ("place"), as in "footprint, track, trace", which later developed the "after; back, behind" senses.
 * Suffice it to say that Old Japanese simu is, given the current state of research, almost certainly not related to . ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 19:02, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your feedback. Yes, many of EDAL sources are wrong. Just sometimes they accidentally find something good. I thought their etymology was so close and that's why I wrote about it. If you think it is wrong, that's possible. Thanks. -- BurakD53 00:15, 2 July 2021 (UTC+3)
 * Cheers BurakD53. I recognize that the Japanese and Korean terms (🇨🇬, root sim-, and 🇨🇬, root sɨmɨi-) are very close both phonologically and semantically, and may well be cognate.  I am extremely cautious of anything coming out of EDAL due to the poor quality of their comparisons and etymologies there.  My interest would certainly rise if you can find some other independent source indicating a connection.  ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 22:39, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi! I definitely will make more research about it. I have found some information about their relation from a proto-korean-japanese etymologic dictionary(link has banned by Wiktionary, you gotta find to see it. Search 'proto-korean-japanese'). They reconstructed it as "soak through" for proto-korean-japanese but it's still complex. I don't want to say anything wrong about etymologies but i believed that they are so close each other even with the way we use in Turkish. For example in daily life you don't use it to say suck but you do when you run out of sth to soak in. For example, when you drink a bottle of juice with a straw, you sömür what's inside. Again in a game, when you get all the gold in the treasury, you sömür it. Turkish Language Association dictionaries also give the meaning of sucking for this word, as well. (There are 4 meanings in total). I guess exploit is another meaning for this word. We don't generally use for to suck but we do for to suck in and to exploit. I hope we can reach a useful and real result, rather than these being cognates. :) + I checked it. It is to suck in in dictionary, it is not to suck. -- BurakD53 17:10, 2 July 2021 (UTC+3)
 * Cheers BurakD53. I recognize that the Japanese and Korean terms (🇨🇬, root sim-, and 🇨🇬, root sɨmɨi-) are very close both phonologically and semantically, and may well be cognate.  I am extremely cautious of anything coming out of EDAL due to the poor quality of their comparisons and etymologies there.  My interest would certainly rise if you can find some other independent source indicating a connection.  ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 22:39, 1 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi! I definitely will make more research about it. I have found some information about their relation from a proto-korean-japanese etymologic dictionary(link has banned by Wiktionary, you gotta find to see it. Search 'proto-korean-japanese'). They reconstructed it as "soak through" for proto-korean-japanese but it's still complex. I don't want to say anything wrong about etymologies but i believed that they are so close each other even with the way we use in Turkish. For example in daily life you don't use it to say suck but you do when you run out of sth to soak in. For example, when you drink a bottle of juice with a straw, you sömür what's inside. Again in a game, when you get all the gold in the treasury, you sömür it. Turkish Language Association dictionaries also give the meaning of sucking for this word, as well. (There are 4 meanings in total). I guess exploit is another meaning for this word. We don't generally use for to suck but we do for to suck in and to exploit. I hope we can reach a useful and real result, rather than these being cognates. :) + I checked it. It is to suck in in dictionary, it is not to suck. -- BurakD53 17:10, 2 July 2021 (UTC+3)
 * Hi! I definitely will make more research about it. I have found some information about their relation from a proto-korean-japanese etymologic dictionary(link has banned by Wiktionary, you gotta find to see it. Search 'proto-korean-japanese'). They reconstructed it as "soak through" for proto-korean-japanese but it's still complex. I don't want to say anything wrong about etymologies but i believed that they are so close each other even with the way we use in Turkish. For example in daily life you don't use it to say suck but you do when you run out of sth to soak in. For example, when you drink a bottle of juice with a straw, you sömür what's inside. Again in a game, when you get all the gold in the treasury, you sömür it. Turkish Language Association dictionaries also give the meaning of sucking for this word, as well. (There are 4 meanings in total). I guess exploit is another meaning for this word. We don't generally use for to suck but we do for to suck in and to exploit. I hope we can reach a useful and real result, rather than these being cognates. :) + I checked it. It is to suck in in dictionary, it is not to suck. -- BurakD53 17:10, 2 July 2021 (UTC+3)

should be from +   right? Seems most logical according to me (piss comes out from front)

If it is right can I add it to its page on my own ?
 * Is it attested too early to be a Western borrowing? Wakuran (talk) 15:19, 4 July 2021 (UTC)
 * "Classical Persian", I saw now. You can disregard that last comment. Wakuran (talk) 15:32, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

More likely the first part is sound-symbolic, like, dialectal ,. --Vahag (talk) 15:47, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Alright makes sense þanks, so im going to only add the etymology info that the second element comes from .LolPacino (talk) 16:11, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

We have a claim on the পেচাপ page that there's a Sanskrit cognate to this, with an extra /r/, which can only be true if it's in fact built from normal words. But if the Persian word was originally onomato-... you know...., then we should probably remove the Sanskrit link. — Soap — 12:05, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I too think the claim must be wrong. LolPacino (talk) 16:11, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Proto-Indo-European -tus and -tós
I'm a bit confused by the two PIE suffixes and. How exactly is Celtic and Germanic  assumed to be derived from PIE ? The latter page is a bit perplexing in this regard at the moment. Gabbe (talk) 05:59, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
 * seems to have been simply misplaced on the PIE root page (maybe someone was confused by, whose u is not from Proto-Germanic?), the entry itself links to the correct PIE form . --Tropylium (talk) 15:47, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

犛
The numerous readings appear to be the conflation of two etymons. Guangyun gives three readings for the character 犛: Guangyun also has the following entries The modern lí reading is a reflex of the 里之切 reading, while the máo reading is a reflex of the 莫交切 reading. 氂：莫袍切 also gives modern máo.
 * 里之切 釐小韻：犛牛又音茅
 * 落哀切 來小韻：關西有長尾牛又音釐音茅
 * 莫交切 茅小韻：牛名又力之切
 * 氂：里之切 釐小韻 "十豪"
 * 氂：莫袍切 毛小韻 "犛牛尾也犛音猫"
 * 髦：莫袍切 毛小韻 "髦鬣也髦俊也"

牦 appears in Jiyun and has the reading 謨袍切 and definition "牛名今所謂偏牛者顔師古説". The character is a 形聲字 formed based on the reading that would give modern máo.

So there are two series of pronunciation for 犛/氂: l- and m-, which I suppose originate from two distinct etymons.

The following are entries in Shuowen Jiezi According to Shuowen, 犛 is the animal, while 氂 is its tail. 犛 is pronounced with l- because its phonetic component is 𠩺. In the received text of Zhuangzi, the character is written as 斄 ("今夫斄牛其大若垂天之雲"), which further supports the l- reading.
 * 犛：西南夷長髦牛也. 从牛，𠩺聲. 凡犛之屬皆从犛.
 * 氂：犛牛尾也. 从犛省从毛.

In 宋本玉篇 however, 犛 and 氂 already appear to be conflated.
 * [犛]莫交切. 獸如牛而尾長名曰犛牛又力之切. 又牛黑也.
 * [氂]莫袍切. 犛牛尾. 或作旄.
 * [氂]音毛. 又音犛. 又音貓.

Is the m- reading of 犛 influenced by 髦 and 旄? RcAlex36 (talk) 08:57, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

 * According to Zhengzhang Shangfang's colophon the "m-" reading of 犛 is 訓讀 (you can see this in the expanded display of Old Chinese reconstructions). This might be the most economic explanation. --Frigoris (talk) 09:11, 5 July 2021 (UTC)

Malay 'cikgu'
I know that the 'cik' part of the word most likely came from a clipping of, but where did the 'gu' part come from? ? Btw, "" means and from my experience, it is used much more than, which is why I'm kind of trying to find the possible etymology of this word. --GinormousBuildings (talk) 01:45, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

sumurlamaq
What can be the origin of this word? I really don't know any Turkic language have such word for 'to think' except sumurlamaq. If there is a Mongolian or any language borrowing that I don't know please contribute to the page. Thanks. --BurakD53 (talk) 03:08, 7 July 2021 (UTC+3)
 * I can’t think of any cognates in any language. I wonder, though, if the verb does not mean (“to miss”) rather than  (“to think of”). What is the origin of the translation?  --Lambiam 10:20, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
 * It is not. See vaqmaq page. I added another example from a Chinese-Salar text and to miss doesn't fit there. --BurakD53 (talk) 14:04, 7 July 2021 (UTC+3)
 * I directly translated from original Chinese translation in Google translate. I checked as a Oghuz speaker, they were look correct. And I did some edits. --BurakD53 (talk) 14:08, 7 July 2021 (UTC+3)
 * I think these translations are not very good. The race between does not involve climbing. The Hare (not rabbit), looking back, sees that the Tortoise has covered only a small distance. Also, I do not see a word in the translation that corresponds to asanlık.  --Lambiam 18:02, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Example of sumurlamaq is pretty correct. I'm Turkish and word by word it is true except the word that I don't know sumurlamaq. Yes, climb in vaqmaq may can be race instead of climb. I don't know chinese and I don't understand that word in Salar. But rabbit is a correct translate. I read the whole text and there was dovşan and it is tavşan in Turkish. It means rabbit. Translate is also translated as rabbit from chinese. Probably asanlık means small distance cause it is only fitting word for it and not wrong when you use it in Turkish in the same way. I will edit that sentence cause the text that I read in Salar is about racing, not about climbing. Thanks for your feedback. --BurakD53 (talk) 22:18, 8 July 2021 (UTC+3)
 * That's the whole text for you.

 <第十四课 龟兔赛跑> Dovşannı dört  incik   var，sögene sögene，yükürse  hasgındır. 兔子长了四条腿，一蹦一跳，跑得可快啦. Qarabağağı da dört incik  var，umukla umukla，asandır asandır. 乌龟也长了四条腿，爬呀，爬呀，爬的真慢，真慢. Bir günü，Dovşan Qarabağanı  uçraşmış，külep  yanşamış:“  Qarabağa， Qarabağa，bizler  bir  yükürişal，yaqşı mı？” 有一天，兔子碰见乌龟，笑眯眯地说:“乌龟，乌龟，咱们来赛跑，好吗？” Qarabağa dovşan  özla  oynaşğanı  bilir，dovşana nam vermemiş. 乌龟知道兔子在跟他开玩笑，不理也不踩. Dovşan bilir Qarabağa özla yükürişelmez,bir  dağ yırla Qarabağanı yırlap külişmiş: 兔子知道乌龟不敢跟他赛跑，编了一支山歌笑话他: “Qarabağa，Qarabağa，umukla umukla， “乌龟，乌龟，爬爬爬， bir erte  qov  çıqsa çiçekni  tatır； 一早出门采花花； Qarabağa，Qarabağa，yür yür  yür， 乌龟，乌龟，走走走， gecesi de  qovnıñ ardında  var. ” 傍晚还在家门口. ” Qarabağa acıqlandı， yanşa:“dovşan，dovşan，sen  zorlanma，yaramasa  bizler  bir  yükürişal. ” 乌龟生气了，说：“兔子，兔子，你别神气活现的，咱们就来赛跑. ” “Neñ，Neñ？Qarabağa，sen yene bir yanşa？” “什么，什么？乌龟，你说什么？” “Bizler emdi  bir  yüküreşal” “咱们这就来赛跑. ” Dovşan bir  diñlese,biciçük qursağını  külip  padatdı:“Qara bağa, sen menle yükürişgür mi? eyle  yaqşı, bizler  mundan yükürişal, kim  ilini dağ cüyindeki  dal  yanı  yetse  kim  utbur. teyiyal！bir，iki，üç——” 兔子一听，差点笑破肚皮：“乌龟，你真敢跟我赛跑？那好，咱们从这儿跑起，看谁先跑到那边山脚下的一棵大树下. 预备！一，二，三——” Dovşan uçqalı  yükür vardı，yükürse  hasgındır，bir  vaqatta  qalor yetdi. 兔子撒开腿就跑，跑的真快，一会儿就跑得很远了. U başını  yanı  bir  vaqsa，Qarabağa asanlığı umuklabar，göñlünde  sumurla:Qarabağa  özü  menla yükürişgür  diybar，asmannıñ  külişgüsidir. 他回过头一看，乌龟才爬了一小段路，心想:乌龟敢跟兔子赛跑，真是天大的笑话. Men munda bir uqlağıl,u özü umukla muña yetgil, emes, u özü  umukla  meniñ  ilime varğıl. men iki sögnegende anı tutdılır. 我呀，在这儿睡上一大觉，让他爬到这儿，不，让他爬到前面去. 我三蹦两跳的，就追上他了. “Lalala，lalala，utqusı meniñdir！” “啦啦啦，啦啦啦，胜利准是我的嘛！” Dovşan poñını  uzat，gözni  yümüp uqladı. 兔子把身子一歪，合上眼皮，真的睡着了. Qarabağa，umuklasa asandır, u  dağa  bir  solaqqa umukla、umukla. 再说乌龟，爬得也真慢，可是他一个劲儿爬、爬、爬. U dovşan  yanı  yetse，yada  ölmiş. 等他爬到兔子身边，已经累坏了. Dovşan uqlağanda, Qarabağa  bir  solağını  alışma umuklağur mu？ 兔子在睡觉，乌龟不会歇口气儿再爬吗？ Emesdir,u dağa  bir  solaqqa  umukla、umukla. 不，他还是一个劲儿地爬、爬、爬. Dal yanı yetgüsi  yaqınlandı，yüz  atlam，elli   atlam，on  atlam -- 离那棵大树不远了，只差100步了，50步了，10步了-- Bu vaqatta，dovşan oyangeldi，uqasıp diymiş“Qarabağa da  yetgelmemiş mi？” 这时候，兔子才醒过来，打了个哈欠说：“乌龟怎么还没有爬到这儿来呀？” U özü ardını  bir  vaqsa,ey,Qarabağa  Qayla varmış？ 他往后一看，咦，乌龟不见了， Yene ilini bir  vaqsa，ey，yaramadı！ 再往前一看，哎呀，不得了！ Qarabağa erden  özü  ilini  umukla  varmış. 乌龟早就爬到他前面去了. Dovşan hasgın  qovlaşsa,qarabağa u dal yanı erden yetmiş. 兔子急忙追上去，可是乌龟已经爬到那棵大树边. Qarabağa utdı！ 乌龟胜利啦！ Dovşan yükürse  hagındır,Qarabağa  yükürse  asandır， 兔子跑得快，乌龟跑得慢， Nege bugez  yükürişde, dovşan utmamış qarabağa utmış？ 为什么这次赛跑，兔子输了，乌龟赢了呢？ Balalar，bir sumurla  senler. 朋友们，想一想. --BurakD53 (talk) 22:30 8 July 2021 (UTC+3)
 * Descendants of have similar sounds (sumurmak, sömürmek).  A similar semantic shift is observed in . But this is too speculative to put in an etymology.  What does the Etymological Dictionary of the Altaic Languages say? Vox Sciurorum (talk) 18:22, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I also realized that they are similar. But I can't connect them. -la is a suffix to make a noun verb and sumur means to suck in with mouth or to swallow. It's a verb. Maybe Salar language just added it to a verb, that's possible. But how did to suck in with mouth become to think? Salar has to be crazy, if it is from *simü-. :D EDAL didn't write anything about Salar at *simü- page. --BurakD53 (talk) 21:43, 8 July 2021 (UTC+3)
 * And thank you for your feedback. I didn't think there was such an origin, but now, after your example for english, I allow it. --BurakD53 (talk) 21:56, 8 July 2021 (UTC+3)

It's from Chinese 思慕. See Tenishev Stroj salarskogo jazyka p. 488. Allahverdi Verdizade (talk) 20:07, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much! Finally it is found. --BurakD53 (talk) 23:40, 8 July 2021 (UTC+3)
 * The first meaning given for 思慕 is rather close to . --Lambiam 22:36, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

 * As to the meaning of umukla, it occurs in many places and is translated as, which can mean “to climb”, but the first sense given in our entry is “to crawl”. --Lambiam 23:16, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

The word and its alternative form  exist as entries, but they are marked as unattested on Reconstruction:Proto-West Germanic/gans. Which is right? — 69.120.64.15 04:29, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
 * They are unattested from what I can tell. Leasnam (talk) 04:15, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

Portuguese / in sense "gay"
Does this have any relation to ?__Gamren (talk) 04:40, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

Nachlass
Is Nachlass related to נחלה, or is it just a coincidence? JulieKahan (talk) 19:15, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Coincidence, it already occurs in  in the sense of inheritance, and the whole root appears to be related to 🇨🇬. Fay Freak (talk) 20:28, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Well yeah, I was assuming maybe the German came from the Hebrew, not the other way around! JulieKahan (talk) 08:43, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
 * It might supposedly have been a folk etymology, but it is a coincidence. Both parts of the German word are old Germanic roots, nach- (after or remaining) is related to nigh (with the English word closer to the original meaning), and -lass (lassen) is related to let, i.e. something "let" or left behind. (French laisser and Italian lasciare seem to be unrelated, from Latin laxō, or possibly conflated with a Germanic word.) Wakuran (talk) 11:54, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
 * The morpheme *hand* and a diminutive suffix /i/ surely existed earlier, too, nevertheless we have Handy as a borrowing from English with some uncertainty about something that was developed in living memory. You cannot simply argue that because two morphemes exist independently that it was not a phono-semantic calque in essence. Legal instruments maybe developed alongside.
 * I do not see a, or a a specificly linguistic definition of coincidence (where I gravitate towards 3. (mathematical analysis) A coincidence point). It is rather informal. So I'm afraid the three of you mean something vaguely different. It includes at least that words are formally unrelated, that should go without saying when the language families are formally unrelated. ApisAzuli (talk) 11:59, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

PGmc *apaliją
Is it possible/likely that (or ) may have been a late levelling of  ? Leasnam (talk) 04:13, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
 * While -l is often perceived as diminunitive today, depending on how far back this is going (cp. pretzel and ) I'd say that could reason for analogy, yes. Although, the etymology as written implies that the variation goes further back (cf. *apalija: "*h₂ébōl, *abel-, *h₂ébl̥").
 * I'm not firm on stem-formation so I cannot take a guess what you have possibly in mind, and why the opposite direction of derivation should be less likely, much less so if the root (or fruit) was likely a wanderword (i.e. a Pandora's Box). ApisAzuli (talk) 19:02, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

模特兒
Since this word includes the sense "fashion model", the proximal source would IMHO be English, not French.--Tibidibi (talk) 02:47, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

 * What is the expected phonetic matching of English to Chinese phonology? Can we exclude the possibility that  was the original source, but that the sense was later extended to also cover the English sense of "fashion model"? Note that  too is explained as a .  --Lambiam 21:44, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

 * French is given as the donor language in 现代汉语规范词典 and 现代汉语词典, but 重編國語辭典修訂本 and 中華語文大辭典 say it's from English. Semantically, it does make more sense for English to be the donor language. — justin(r)leung { (t...) 00:52, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Could the dictionaries be saying that the "ultimate" source of the word is French, since the English word itself comes from French?--Tibidibi (talk) 03:13, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

 * It could be the case since these dictionaries aren’t necessarily very precise with etymologies. — justin(r)leung { (t...) 03:32, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

 * I just checked 汉语外来词词典 and 新华外来词词典, and they list French as the source of the English word. I think we should just change it to English as the donor to Chinese. — justin(r)leung { (t...) 16:11, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

Etymology of Будь-який
I would like to explain on the term будь-який and its etymology. Try to see its meanings, будь means "to be", and який means "what, which, who". And try to compare with the Croatian term bilo koji. Bilo means "to be", same to bio "was", and koji means "what, which, who". The Croatian term is almost similar as Ukrainian. Is it possible that these terms are related? Adamdaniel864 (talk) 12:13, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I don't know about Slavic interrelationships but I would on semantic grounds compare both (German beid- which adduces Slavic and more for PIE *bʰoh₁, which might well be an artefact of longer phrases such as yours, although *bʰuH- ("to be") is originally non-ablauting, the undisclosed laryngeal leaves room for doubt. This would be similar to each, *h1ey-, versus *h1e- (*ey ~ y) and *h1es-, *h1esti-. See also Spanish Spanish f. ex. ambos (instrumental suffix *-bhi), los dos (los, ille, akin to *y), entrambos, that may as well be uncanny coincidence. "be" appears also in translations of wherever, anywhere, and others, cp. Lat. ubi possibly with the instrumental suffix. ApisAzuli (talk) 18:04, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

mariguana
The Spanish wiktionary has this as the original form of marihuana. Isn't it fairly obvious that the tail end has to relate to ganja, cáñamo, etc., cannabis?

There's a dedicated WP article for the word that suggests occurance in Mexican Spanish and refers to comparisons all over the place:

> Chinese ma ren hua (麻仁花, lit. 'hemp seed flower'), possibly itself originating as a loan from an earlier semitic root *mrj'' "hemp"

> ''The Semitic root is also found in the Spanish word mejorana and in English marjoram

Nevertheless, it is uncertain. Wikipedia Espaniola (cf. Cannabis Sativa) lists synonyms including mora, which I'd take to support the notion of mine albeit uncertain in meaning of a compound with huana, guana. The similarity to Hanf is curious as well, while I am incredulous about the Iranian substrate in Proto-Germanic. I have not looked closely at it (eg. history of the tabu, or Mexicano), so I shan't solve the riddle, but I do have an idea. Indica and Sativa species or cultivars are notably distinguished, Sativa is commonly associated with Africa, and Spain is very close to Africa indeed. While Asiatic product is more likely to ship as hashish, interpretations of Marijuana (cf. WP) have it as bud or pollen.

Can anyone offer a comparison for a *-(X)uana, since neither canna, caña nor ganja match exactly? Arabic qinnab maybe? ApisAzuli (talk) 10:58, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
 * The talk about “Semitic root” is of course embarrassing hogwash, like the English-language sources en.Wikipedians cling to, which you can only maintain if you do not write a dictionary. There is no “root *mrj ‘hemp’’. There is a root mrr meaning “bitter”,, and there is an Indo-Iranian noun meaning a vague lamiaceous or capparaceous “herb” occurring only in borrowed words (→ ). I see no similarity.
 * The frequency of the Chinese combination looks dubious.
 * In sum I see no similarity. One can only pity those wo extract their etymological information from Wikipedia without language knowledge and judgment.
 * And if it is drug slang it can be anything. Maybe someone was tripping in the traphouse and that’s the origin.
 * I place of picking words of this magnitude I am more interested in the origin of . If it’s so recent we should find the source it emanated from? Or will even this stay covered up? Fay Freak (talk) 03:51, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
 * jab backwards, well in line with the first quotation going to UK. Doesn't really belong in this thread. ApisAzuli (talk) 10:12, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
 * On second thougt, it would be a relevant insight if there was a likely transfer of semantics from smoking a pipe and taking a hit to smoking ganja. I do unironically not believe the etymology of from reversal under taboo corruption, in case that comparison to the Sino-Tibetic family must be statistically likely (didn't it also mean "pipe"? cf.  🇨🇬, bong, ES, Jul 2017). Any etymology for chanupa, Lakota čhaŋnúŋpa or calumet, Norman "sort of reeds used to make pipes", etc. (en.WP: Ceremonial pipe), would go a lomng way to prove precedent for hopefully related pipe words, but is out of the question at any reasonable time depths. The significance of fiber is of course more significant for the plant.
 * My question was just about marijuana. I can take the lack of responses to mean that speculation on a purely phonologic basis is not well conducive to historical linguistics, but do note for a start that palatalization from a high vowel as in qinnab is reminiscent of cuina.
 * On a related note, I have inquired with Vambian Mandinka speakers who devulged a translation as approximately ŋa-mɐ (or ngamo, nyamo), which they considered a native word unlike ganja. I think it's possibly a loan, no idea though about dating the changes, if those might be informative for the spread. ApisAzuli (talk) 06:16, 23 July 2021 (UTC) Update: The Gambian Mandinka word is (cf. "nyàamoo", David P. Gamble, 1987). ApisAzuli (talk) 05:37, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

gratis
is the contracted ablative plural of gratia, but is it an ablativus modi/instrumentalis/causae or an ablativus pretii? In other words: if you do something gratis, do you do it it strictly because you extend your very own grace, "out of kindness" (abl. modi) or rather because you expect many thanks/gratiae in return? (Our very souls are at stake here: sed gratis iustificentur propter Christum per fidem sez the Confessio Augustana...is God fishing for compliments here or is he happy to wallow in his own good grace, which is boundless and unconditional etc. anyway?). --2003:DA:A714:2600:34BC:77E:B13F:D863 17:22, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
 * My money is on instrumentalis. Salvation is provided to the faithful by the graces [of the donor] . We cannot pay for admittance to the Kingdom of Heavens by our own work, however good and pious, so pretii is out. --Lambiam 10:15, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

धातु
means "element; component; constituent; etc.". Is this word derived from 🇨🇬? If so, how? --Frigoris (talk) 19:45, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I added an etymology. —Caoimhin ceallach (talk) 21:31, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

pillowbeer
Juuuuuust checking to make sure this etymology is correct. pillowbeer is listed as deriving from a compound of pillow and BEAR, presumably in the sense of bear(er). Which means that the spelling and pronunciation are both irregular. This word has just a single citation, and at first blush I thought it was a mistake (to be fair, I was thinking of the animal), but I think this is wholly plausible and yet not really  an open and shut case, as we say. — Soap — 12:04, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

тавр (T-beam)
I've seen two possible etymologies for the Russian term mentioned in online discussions, but neither with any good support: Tetromino (talk) 13:55, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
 * from Latin or Ancient Greek, referring to the “horned” shape of the beam's cross section. This theory is given in the Russian Wikipedia, but with zero references, and I haven't been able to find any references myself after searching. It also seems rather fanciful.
 * from the shape of the Greek letter tau. This theory is in line with the name of the beam in other languages (T-beam in English and in Polish both derive from the shape of the letter T). But then where did the terminal «р» come from in Russian, and why did «у» in  turn into «в»? Was the term borrowed through the intermediary of another language?
 * The Greek word tau is actually pronounced /tav/, so the «в» isn't a problem. Mårtensås (talk) 19:31, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Could the -р be related to the -ёр-ending, as in a "Tauer"? Maybe not... Wakuran (talk) 12:28, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Another idea that occurred to me is that the term might derive from the name of the former town of Tavrov, which was the site of a major naval shipyard in the 18th century. It is very likely that wooden T-beams were used in naval construction. In that case, the noun might derive from the adjective  in the sense of “Tavrov-type beam”. And a google search shows a couple of 19th century usages of the adjective  (in nautical context), but no pre-20th century usage examples for the noun . But this is purely my own conjecture. Tetromino (talk) 14:05, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
 * , the suffix would be stressed, so I don't see how the vowel in it could get reduced. Tetromino (talk) 14:12, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I guess you're right. I was just thinking aloud... Wakuran (talk) 15:26, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Meaning of "batu" as "mile" in Malay is a semantic borrowing from English?
I know that "batu" is an original Austronesian word that Malay inherited from its ancestor languages, but how did it get the definition "mile"?

Could it be that this was a semantic borrowing from the English idiom "a stone's throw" which means "a short distance"? --GinormousBuildings (talk) 05:09, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
 * A more plausible source would be from the concept of a milestone: it would be pretty easy for the name of something used to mark a distance to be transferred to the distance itself. That said, I have no idea whether stone distance markers were known at the time and place that the term originated. Although Malay Wikipedia has an article for Batu Penanda, it seems to be a translated copy of Milestone at English Wikipedia. Chuck Entz (talk) 06:02, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I see that 🇨🇬 includes a sense of, so that may not be too far off (if the Indonesian sense is correct). ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 17:44, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
 * You can observe similar semantic evolution in other languages; e.g. see Russian, which came to mean both a unit of length (a verst) and a verst-post (~ milestone) marking out such a length on a highway. Tetromino (talk) 17:52, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
 * The full range of meanings 'stone' > 'milestone' > 'mile' is documented in Wilkinson's Malay-English dictionary from 1901. –Austronesier (talk) 09:31, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Strange expected Cantonese reflex of some more Chinese characters
The Cantonese readings of the characters (MC *zɨoŋ),  (MC *zɨ) and  (MC *ziuɪn) are cung4, ci4 and ceon4 respectively, and other words with a  (z) initial and a level tone corresponds to a c initial in Cantonese. However, according to the Wiktionary module, the expected Cantonese reflex of these characters should have the z initial instead. I believe this is another error of the module. StrongestStrike (talk) 05:16, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
 * pinging for help. --Frigoris (talk) 19:36, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for finding this error. It should be fixed now. — justin(r)leung { (t...) 20:19, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I am sorry that the notification did not work. Great thanks to for the editing. Graphemecluster (talk) 18:05, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

मदन
I've added this term for "passion" etc., which is derived from a verb root, but the dictionaries say there are additional meanings These definitions don't obviously relate to the one already added.
 * beeswax
 * the myna bird, or some kind of bird

I don't know where to find the text for quotations for these definitions. Some pages (such as ) link to the Sanskrit term as etymological source.

Please help me check the page as it is now, and if you can, please add the definitions/derivations/quotes for these senses, please. Thank you! --Frigoris (talk) 19:34, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Not knowing much Sanskrit, a qualified guess is that the word beeswax would be related to मधु (mádhu, "honey" etc.) Wakuran (talk) 21:37, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
 * thanks, it is of course a possibility. My uncertainties is about the lack of quotation from dictionaries such as Monier Williams's, in which the senses "beeswax" and "a bird" are listed as "according to lexicographers", which suggests that they might be dictionary-only words. I don't know where to find any examples of actual usage. --Frigoris (talk) 08:27, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Now I realize that the d sound is unaspirated in मदन, while aspirated in मधु. Not sure if that could be explained, or if that would be an indicator against my hypothesis. Wakuran (talk) 12:08, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I also find that difficult with Sanskrit. Dictionaries have a gazillion meanings listed for every word. I think it's best to just start with what seem to be the core meanings and leave a reference for people who want more, also because there are still so many words which don't have an entry at all. I modified your etymology and added a more elaborate one at the root . —caoimhinoc (talk) 22:58, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

ਲਹੌਰ
RFV of the etymology. removed this and has been edit-warring to keep it removed. Chuck Entz (talk) 21:40, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

ciss
"(of paint, varnish, or oil) To retract (from a uniform film applied to a damp, oily or nonabsorbent surface) and clump up into small droplets" : What's the etymology of this? Related to rescission or recess? - -sche (discuss) 20:57, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
 * It looks like a back-formation of a noun cission. This does not exist in English. (The word exists in French, but with an unrelated meaning.) The homophone noun, however, seems a semantically plausible ur-form. --Lambiam 21:55, 20 July 2021 (UTC)
 * The term scission can be found here applied to droplet formation. See also the use of the term in the Wikipedia article . We further list a verb as a back-formation of, although not with this specific meaning but with a transitive sense.  --Lambiam 09:54, 21 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Interesting finds! I wonder if French cission might have the same root after all; it connects itself to ("clip, shear"),, and I can see how either root (cis- "cut, shear" or sciss- "split, divide") might lead to this. Indeed, the two roots seem to have become conflated in scissor and hence sciss. (Side note, it would be helpful if someone filled in the French entries we're missing, cission and cisaille.) - -sche (discuss) 19:20, 21 July 2021 (UTC)
 * The French noun cisaille is cognate with (another, different cutting tool).  --Lambiam 22:11, 21 July 2021 (UTC)
 * It seems that booth cis- and sciss- are derivations from Latin caedo. Wakuran (talk) 15:45, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
 * According to our entries, sciss- is from scindo/scissus, not caedo/caesus. It is interesting that the terms have diverged and converged in similarity to each other periodically over time; English ciss- and sciss- sound similar, Latin caedo and scindo are quite different, but their PIE ancestors *kh₂eyd- "possibly from *(s)kh₂ey-" and *skinédti from *skeyd- from *skey- are again relatively similar. (Neat coincidence?) - -sche (discuss) 21:24, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

noonie
What do we think is the etymology of this word? Some people online suggest it comes from a Bengali word referring to genitalia of both sexes; others claim it comes from the vacuum cleaner ‘Noo-noo’ in Teletubbies; still others claim it has something to do with the word ‘nun’. As a matter of fact I heard the pop singer Anne-Marie use the word ‘nun/noon’ (with the PUT/FOOT vowel, rather than like nun or noon) on Celebrity Gogglebox, though this is perhaps just a shortening rather than of etymological interest.Overlordnat1 (talk) 18:11, 21 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Could it be baby talk? Wakuran (talk) 18:56, 21 July 2021 (UTC)
 * See . . Fay Freak (talk) 19:30, 21 July 2021 (UTC)
 * It’s interesting to see the original Sanskrit word refer to female genitalia and all the derivatives seemingly refer to male genitalia but perhaps it changed its meaning when it passed into English, or can be used more generally in other languages than our definitions suggest? ‘Nun’ seems an unlikely origin because of the different vowel sound and it’s perhaps a too recent coinage to be from the Teletubbies (which would in any case require a change in vowel sound too). Perhaps it is simply baby talk but how would we prove that?Overlordnat1 (talk) 20:21, 21 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I forgot to mention that we still want explanation why 🇨🇬 came to be 🇨🇬, but this term may be of a differently transmitted kind. Fay Freak (talk) 20:35, 21 July 2021 (UTC)
 * An etymology from the negative prefix and yoni is almost trivial trivial, thus meaning puer in derivatives, though a rational is difficult to imagine. ApisAzuli (talk) 03:39, 23 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Colloquial baby talk (yet again) coinage, similar to Swedish snippa (not related to English snip), French zézette or, partly, English va-jay-jay? Wakuran (talk) 12:02, 23 July 2021 (UTC)
 * According to our entries for and yoni they’re not related as far as I can see but maybe the final syllable of noonie comes from yoni or the childish reduplication of sounds found in words like poo-poo, wee-wee and va-jay-jay produced ‘noo-noo’ in English or some other language which got corrupted into noonie. I’m tempted to put something along the lines of ‘probably from Hindi’ as the etymology for the entry but I’ll see what consensus forms first.Overlordnat1 (talk) 17:53, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Regarding Special:Diff/63331732 - I understand you doubting the existence of the suffix, but why revert everything else and call the whole etymology 'nonsense'? This doesn't seem fair or constructive. Here are other words that have the same frequentative suffix, even if it's rare, at least before Late Latin: fissiculō, missiculō, pēnsiculō. Admittedly, most of the hits here are denominative from the. In this case however the noun is not attested in Latin at all, and the Romance cognates such as badalh can easily themselves be deverbal. Therefore this etymology seems much less likely, although I still mentioned it as a possibility. The three verbs I adduced with that suffix also don't seem to possess the corresponding noun; some others I've checked derive from a feminine, e.g. tudiculō. I'm sure if one sorts through words in -gliare, -gghiari, -lhar in the Romance languages one will find more examples of this frequentative formation.

I also don't understand the "reconstructed" label (the word is in TLL and has three attestations) as well as your reverts to the definition and the vowel lengths. Brutal Russian (talk) 08:30, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
 * 1. Show me a paper that claims is a Latin frequentative suffix. 2. Reconstruction:Latin/badaculum has descendants which point to its existence and negates the necessity for such a suffix for . --  18:20, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

摺紙
RFV of the etymology. . --沈澄心✉ 12:49, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

dayı
(and cognates) and are suspiciously similar, both meaning maternal uncle, yet they are claimed to be unrelated, with the first assigned a proto-Turkic root and the second. OTK traces to a 13th century form ṭayı. Nişanyan mentions a first millennium Uighur text transliterated as taġay. Nourai traces Persian dâyê to Avestan daenu (presumably ) to Proto-Indo European.

Any thoughts? Perhaps a very old Turkic borrowing from an Iranian language? Vox Sciurorum (talk) 10:20, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Serbo-Croatian vs Proto-Slavic ?
(Ijekavian form of ) is definitely related to ←  (cf. ‘sijélo’ in https://hjp.znanje.hr/) and looks pretty much like a descendant of  to me, with clear reflex of *-ě- in it – but Derksen doesn’t list any South or East Slavic descendants (and just assumes that in both branches the etymon merged completely with ), it might be that he wasn’t aware of this word(?). Has anyone seen this etymology proposed in any dictionary or article? Should be added to the descendants of ? (originally posted in Talk of *sědlo) // Silmeth @talk 11:50, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
 * It’s a perfect reflex as far as I can tell. If it’s not a descendant it’s an exactly parallel formation (equivalent to ). Probably it would make the most sense to list it as a descendant, as in practice there’s no way of distinguishing the two. — Vorziblix (talk · contribs) 04:38, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
 * It'froms far from perfect, because the semantic drift from "seat" is arbitrary. There is precedent for both, session (sed) or German, {(cp. Saal, Seilschaft). Greek  for example is nearly homophone with  and although one might be inclined to think so hedonism does not refer to lounging and seating. Seilschaft is homophone with  (cp. sole, perhaps soul), which can be mistaken for entangled relations indeed. Actually, " *sh₂éy-ōl ~ *sh₂i-l-és, from *sh₂ey- (“to bind, fetter”)" could also be expected to come implying wind down, unwind, if the day ends for horsemen when the horses are fettered and the garments layed off. ApisAzuli (talk) 08:13, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
 * The Croatian dictionary doesn’t seem to have any doubts it is related to sjesti (to sit down) and they don’t give any other possible etymology. They just do not provide earlier forms (nor say whether it’s a later formation or inherited PSl. word).

 * And the semantic change isn’t that arbitrary, Polish too has analogical siedzenie (seat) vs posiedzenie (meeting, session), change from here to ‘evening meeting’ is easy. // Silmeth @talk 09:08, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Again, that's easy to confuse with position, pono, PIta *po- + *sino (PIE *tḱey-). See also recess, cedo, uncertain whether from *ḱyesdʰ- (“to drive away; to go away”, comparing, Avestan ) or indeed from *sed, and *ḱye, *ḱe-. Note that *tḱey has the by-form *ḱey- (to be lying down; to settle).
 * For *ḱyesdʰ- I would by the way try Ger. Kiez (quarters) in the sense of banlieu, indeed Abseits, abseits.
 * My poor phonology notwithstanding, the only point is that any semantic derivation is imaginable, and consequently so any form of reanalysis. Admittedly, I see no party next to *posino, but do note that rhotacism could be expected, and the PIE origin of  pars is less than certain.
 * That said, I am not sure if the linked website is based on a dictionary, though it'd be the immediate answer to your question. Whether it were reliable should be another matter. I cannot show that the morphology implies "sitting" besides "seat". Can you? ApisAzuli (talk) 12:20, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Not sure I follow what you’re arguing for/against here. *(t)ḱey- would yield PBSl. *sī- → PSl. *si- and I think the *-s of *(t)ḱeys- shouldn’t disappear in Slavic either. Then even if it comes from a different PIE root, the pre-Croatian PSl. form would still need to be *sědlo (and if that continues not only *sed-, but also some other root – then it might be that this PSl. word’s etymology is more complicated than *sed- + *lo, but doesn’t change the *sědlo → *sijélo transition). Though I guess another proto-form could be *sětlo (hypothetically from ? – but here I think the accent wouldn’t match – not sure though, my understanding of PSl. and BCSM accentuation is poor) or *sělo if from PBSl. *s/śoylo- (but not sure what that would be).
 * And I believed the linked Croatian dictionary which links sijelo to sjesti to be a reliable one (and it is based on multiple printed dictionaries, edit: and etymologies seem to be based on Ranko Matasović’s) – but I admit I don’t know the reality of Serbo-Croatian dictionaries too well either.
 * That’s why I asked here. *sědlo is one PSl. term that’s been already reconstructed in reliable sources (but only on West Slavic evidence) that seems to fit this term pretty well too, while I haven’t seen the other options postulated anywhere. I hoped for input of people who might have either seen this etymology already postulated somewhere or have seen/thought of other ones. // Silmeth @talk 13:16, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I am arguing pro inclusion, and against overstating the case. I have added two sentences to now and remarked some doubt in the desc-tree to . ApisAzuli (talk) 15:13, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
 * “Indistinguishable and conflated in dialect with sélo from *selo (“village”)” – this makes no sense. and  are the same word (seemingly from *sědlo) from different dialects, they were not conflated, just the vowel has different reflexes (either ije or e). It’s  (in both dialectal groups) with different accent that continues  (and that’s a word that Derksen notes in his entry for *selo too). // Silmeth @talk 17:00, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
 * And if I weren’t clear in my original message, when talking about I really meant both sijélo and sélo (which also lacks etymology on Wiktionary) – I just used the Ijekavian form because it has clearer reflex of the original *ě (while in  only the accent/vowel length gives a clue about its origin different than that of ). // Silmeth @talk 17:10, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I suppose I should have said this in my original reply, but Skok’s etymological dictionary is explicit about it being equivalent to . The notion of ‘sitting’ is closely tied with that of ‘social gathering’ in the Serbocroatian semantic space in any case; for obvious parallels within Serbocroatian itself see, for example, . — Vorziblix (talk · contribs) 15:35, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I missed that, but I don't think it's a defeating argument and it is inappropriate to add it to the descendents unless so old. Of course the word "makes sense" within the context of the dialect, but is there more than circular reasoning to it?
 * Let me give you an example why I am stressing this although it's not my problem to begin with: salsa music is commonly understood to be from the salsa sauce, which makes zero sense, but that is why it's funny and perhaps possible. However, could it anyway continue Latin, thus 'dance music', perhaps through puns, and how could anyone decide that that's not the case, if it has the ring of folk etymology?
 * The irony that we reconstruct the same root *sel- for salio as well as for should not be missed. If  were formed in a multilingual continuum, the assumption does not yet exclude that selo may have had the same meaning already, maybe substituted in Ijekavian--if dating permits. See also, from ,  under influence of  (de.WP). What it would be based on is not so much my point, sessio, salio, Albanian  (see the cognates, see also sittsam), whether by analogy or not, who knows. Thus I had shoehorned it with the German comparison.
 * I wasn't happy with the wording either, but the statement is at least not wrong unless "conflated" had a well defined meaning, or if you disagree that the respective dialect would be inclined to think of a house party nor town hall meeting.
 * Conversely, the surface analysis would need a strong argument from diachrony, to count for anything. If it is possibly older the the dialects and the reflex of ě is good, wouldn't the dental in *-dlo > -lo meddle with Winter' s Law?
 * So, the formation would have to be later, so late so that the tool suffix had widened enough to be abstract. If the suffix was however productive much earlier, as it were, it might give "seat" (cf. stool) and hence maybe *sed- as backformation, pending a congruent head. Cf. "The [dynamic] root *sed is analyzed as a post-Anatolian innovation; it is implied that the dynamic PIA stem *h₁e-h₁s became stative in post-Anatolian PIE and replaced the older stative *h₁es." (Petr Kocharov: [Review] Alwin Kloekhorst and Tijmen Pronk (eds.). The Precursors of Proto-Indo-European: The Indo-Anatolian and Indo-Uralic Hypotheses, 2019). ApisAzuli (talk) 22:18, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I must admit I’m confused as to what you’re trying to say in much of your response. On the concrete subject of the wording in the entries, the statement was wrong, because it’s not ‘indistinguishable and conflated’ (by pretty much any definition of the words), as pitch accent is phonemic in Serbocroatian, and the pitch accents simply do not match. Moreover, every reliable linguistic source we have supports a straightforward etymological relation to and not to any sort of speculative phono-semantic matching with Albanian, or Latin, etc., if I’m correctly grasping what you’re suggesting. Incidentally, I’ll also note that our definition doesn’t quite capture the meaning of, which can range from a small evening visit between neighbors, to a village-wide evening of traditional music and amusements, to a witches’ sabbath or a forest gathering of . That is, the ‘village’ part of our definition is, to begin with, quite incidental to the meaning of the word. Edit: In fact, the ‘in the village’ part of our definition is apparently translated from , which would be more accurately rendered as ‘rural’ in this context. — Vorziblix (talk · contribs) 05:09, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I’m confused too. What I think he might be getting at is the “merger” of the two etymons suggested by Derksen in his dictionary that I mentioned earlier – but Derksen apparently suggested that exactly because he did not know about any South Slavic reflexes of *sědlo (specifically, he never mentions s(ij)élo anywhere in his dictionary) – and that’s the only reason I started this discussion, to see if there is some clear reason to excluse sélo from descendants of *sědlo (like clear evidence for it being much later formation, or clear alternative etymology).
 * “wouldn't the dental in *-dlo > -lo meddle with Winter' s Law?” – I have no clue how to understand this question. Why would it meddle with it? The dental here is the reason for Winter’s Law operating in this root. The -dl- → -l- change is a centuries-or-millenia later process which did not in any way reverse Winter’s Law effects.
 * And the fact that Serbo-Croatian keeps sèlo and s(ij)élo as separate words clearly shows they were not conflated in any way (except for perhaps slight influence on exact semantics, adding the in the village/rural part of the definition). // Silmeth @talk 11:27, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

गुण
This Sanskrit term means "bowstring; cord; string; etc." and also "quality; character; virtue; etc" Monier Williams says the root is, but I can hardly see how? Some dictionaries consider or even  to be the class-10 root, but what that means seems that the root is verbalized from the nominal, rather than the other way around. Is there a reliable source on the etymology of this word? --Frigoris (talk) 17:43, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
 * The etymology of गुण is unknown, but you're right, it's definitely not related to ग्रह्. —caoimhinoc (talk) 20:15, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
 * It seems the sense "quality; character" could be related to, whose Etymology section posits an earlier Iranian source. That still leaves the possibility that 1 = "bowstring" and 2 = "quality" were two different etyma? --Frigoris (talk) 18:47, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
 * That's certainly possible. Someone tried to connect . I don't know Avestan, but the long vowel seems problematic. —caoimhinoc (talk) 20:27, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

хозяин
Is the plural related to it being a loan word and could it be considered a foreign-plural ? Dngweh2s (talk) 20:29, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
 * The word was borrowed from a Turkic source, but the -ев suffix in the plural form does not sound like any Turkic plural suffix (-сем in Chuvash, -лар/-нар/-тар etc. in other Turkic languages). I think it's more likely that there existed two alternative forms of the word in Russian (хозяинъ and хозяевъ in the singular) and their declensions merged in this interesting way. Indeed, in modern colloquial Russian, you sometimes see  interpreted as a singular form (e.g. «продам хорошему хозяеву»). Tetromino (talk) 13:31, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Cataloi

 * was: I'm trying to find the Greek etymology for the village of Cataloi, Romania

The village is in Eastern Romania, in an area which used to have a Greek population and the village's attestation is from 1573, early in the Turkish colonization.

I found some references saying that it's a name of Greek origin, but without saying which is the exact source word in Greek. I suppose it could be something like κατάλογος (as /ɣ/ can turn into /j/), but I don't know how that would make sense as a place name. Could there be any other similar place names in the wider medieval Greek world? Bogdan (talk) 19:26, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

 * Bogdan, I moved your entry to the etymology room. Apparently the village name has also been spelled Katalui, and katalui is a form of the verb —most books I see which mention this are referring to the verb's use fo mean "destroy" in the Bible, but according to our entry the verb also has the sense "stay somewhere for one night, find a lodgement", so perhaps that's a candidate. - -sche (discuss) 23:55, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Re your initial hypothesis, it seems to me the diminutive would be a phonetically more likely candidate: compare 🇨🇬, from 🇨🇬. PUC – 12:42, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Possible ghost word "indigmna"
The entry for the Italian word indigeno gives the following puzzling etymology: "From Vulgar Latin *indigmna, contracted from Latin indigena." It's unclear how a form with /m/ would either develop from contraction of the Latin form with -gen-, or explain the development of the Italian form with -gen-. The source cited, Pianigiani, does not seem to give the confusing "Vulgar Latin contraction" explanation, but simply says the Italian word is "dal lat. INDIGMNA" with no further elaboration on the M in place of E. I was tempted to think this is a scanno, but the M does seem to be present in the visual scans of this source; however, I feel it is more likely than not that it is a typo or error of some sort. Would anyone disagree with me changing the etymology to state that Italian "indigeno" is borrowed from Classical Latin "indigenus" (the second-declension collateral form of "indigena")?--Urszag (talk) 23:02, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Go ahead. It's pretty obviously a typo in the 1907 book. —Mahāgaja · talk 07:10, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Proto-Indo-European/átta
Vestige from Pre-Proto-Indo-European origen? cognates with tata in Quechua. Interestingly also in Quechua mama means mother. --190.172.86.135 23:29, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Nope. See Lallwort. Babies go through a universal sequence of sounds in their babbling as they progressively develop better control of their vocal apparatus. Names for things associated with babies- especially family members- tend to be based on those sounds (mostly labial- ba/pa/ma and dental- da/ta/na). You can find such similar-sounding words in almost any language anywhere in the world. It's only when you can see regular patterns of correspondance such as Latin p: Germanic f, that you can show a common inheritance. Chuck Entz (talk) 04:30, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
 * If those sounds are as universal as you say, they are much less likely to change than *kʷ > Greek p, t, k, for example. They still change, but if the basic lexical stock is thought to be most conservative, while a rate of lexical replacement about 5 - 15% per milennium and copious semantic drift can be usually assumed, the oldest lexical stock would have not much to compare with, so it is a Catch-22 trying someone to prove anything like that. There is by the way the genious notion that mama words (baba, anna) do recall a suckling motion (similar to an ingressive kiss, or say om nom nom), which was not widely accepted and is consequently difficult to search, but it was professional work. At least it explains why labials are among the earliest phonemes in speech acquisition. That dada words would develope by dissimilation could be a good guess.
 * Conversely, there is no good reason to accept that lull-words be admitted into the natural language without any amount of conditioned acculturation. Otherwise you would expect a plethora of individualized words in English alone, but we do see specialization instead and we do etymologize words like bosom and that even has a tentative internal derivation. Why, an etymology for tata or  especially, which is known to be problematic, should not be unthinkable albeit difficult to imagine. ApisAzuli (talk) 10:54, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
 * The universal sequence of sounds that emerge in babbling is not really related to the stability of sounds in diachronic change. Labials emerge almost at the same time, yet [m] is empirically far more stable than [p].
 * The point with *atta is that such words become lexicalized in (near-)identical shape all over the place and at any time. Subsequent sound changes are important, because these give us the only tool that allows to safely distinguish chance resemblances from common inheritance. –Austronesier (talk) 11:42, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
 * "almost at the same time" is handwaving, and "empirically" is questionable. Is the measure appropriate for the task at hand, square phoneme per mile to the word root, where the norm rests on the very prior that is in question?
 * The usual answer to questions of bright shiny objects should be ignored or meta, that they cannot be answered to satisfaction and don't really belong here.
 * Whether there's a good answere at all depended on the phonological and language developmental frameworks, especially if a nearly universal progression was claimed while the import of reinforcement was ignored. ApisAzuli (talk) 18:31, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/