User talk:Irman

Welcome!

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

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

These links may help you familiarize yourself with Wiktionary:

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

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

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

Again, welcome!

Hello, Irman. Mazanderani وازیک (vâzik, “sand”) is a very interesting possible cognate. What is your source for it? --Vahag (talk) 22:38, 5 January 2014 (UTC)Reply

I know a little Mazanderani, but for source you can see here (Irman (talk) 11:33, 6 January 2014 (UTC))Reply

I want to advise Hrach Martirosyan, a linguist, about the existence of this word. Maybe he will need to cite it. Do you know if وازیک (vâzik, “sand”) is mentioned in some academic source? A book, article, dictionary? It doesn't matter, if such source is unavailable online. --Vahag (talk) 13:13, 6 January 2014 (UTC)Reply

I don't know about published sources.(Irman (talk) 13:34, 6 January 2014 (UTC))Reply

Martirosyan says thanks. By the way, please consider adding a Babel box to your user page. --Vahag (talk) 14:55, 6 January 2014 (UTC)Reply

Hi. What is your source for this edit? All the sources I have say Middle Iranian *tāg “crown” is unattested. We only have Manichaean Middle Persian (not Parthian) tʾg “arch” (not “crown”). --Vahag (talk) 23:08, 15 January 2014 (UTC)Reply

My source was from compound word "xārtāg" means "crown of thorns" in Dictionary Of Manichean Middle Persian & Parthian.(Irman (talk) 16:05, 16 January 2014 (UTC))Reply

It is a very interesting finding, thank you. Seems that Armenologists do not know about that attestation. But still, the source doesn't say the Persian word was borrowed from Parthian. Parthian is not the ancestor of Persian, so unless there is evidence to the contrary a borrowing should not be presumed. Do you mind if I change "from Parthian..." to "compare Parhtian..."? The same for کلان and نزم. By the way, you can use the {{R:xpr:DMMPP}} template now. --Vahag (talk) 18:24, 17 January 2014 (UTC)Reply

I completely agree with you and thank you for template.(Irman (talk) 09:04, 18 January 2014 (UTC))Reply

از پیوست دیکشنری مکنزی "ADDENDA ET CORRIGENDA".(Irman (talk) 16:16, 16 January 2014 (UTC))Reply

Hi, I'd like to know the sources for the etymology of لاش (lâš) if possible. A link if it's from a site, or the impressum if it's from a book. Thanks in advance.

Hi. Did you use some source in linking پچین (pačin) with Sanskrit पादचिह्न (pādacihna)? My sources take it to Old Iranian *pati-čagnaka- without mentioning the Sanskrit word. --Vahag (talk) 20:38, 7 December 2014 (UTC)Reply

Hi! In answer to your question I have to say that I found it from a sanskrit dictionary on the web. maybe I made a mistake, but there is another word in Parthian "pādmuhr" wich seems to me to be a translation of the Sanskrit.(Irman (talk) 06:16, 8 December 2014 (UTC))Reply

The similarity must be accidental. I have now expanded the etymology with references. --Vahag (talk) 17:01, 8 December 2014 (UTC)Reply

Hi, would you like to expand the short page for the term ‎نخبه‌گرا? --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 15:39, 17 December 2014 (UTC)Reply

Also expand اشکانیان (which I found at Short Pages, as found in the Community Portal), if you can and have the time. --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 15:53, 17 December 2014 (UTC)Reply

And کارورزی --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 16:10, 17 December 2014 (UTC)Reply

And بنیان‌گذار --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 16:29, 17 December 2014 (UTC)Reply

What would you like to know more about those words? they all have clear meaning.(Irman (talk) 16:54, 17 December 2014 (UTC))Reply

You could apply the plural and the Tajik Cyrillic counterpart spelling (if applicable), if you can. --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 16:56, 17 December 2014 (UTC)Reply

What;s the transliteration of ترک ترک? Could you also examine the transliteration of تقو? --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 10:50, 18 December 2014 (UTC)Reply

There is no word ترک ترک in persian as I know, but it seems to be an afghan colloquialism. تقو has wrong dictation. the correct form is تقوی similar to arabic.(Irman (talk) 15:32, 18 December 2014 (UTC))Reply

Hello, why have you removed the context label? Surely it is either archaic or obsolete? Kaixinguo (talk) 16:32, 18 December 2014 (UTC)Reply

Because if you label such a word as obsolete or archaic you would do this on almost 80% of persian vocabulary. Persian is not a first language of most of people in Iran, Afghanistan and less in Tajikstan, so people used to speak with small vocabulary in everyday conversation through history. but educated people could understand them, if not they couldn't understand classical texts. I tried to explain it, sorry my english is not good.(Irman (talk) 19:31, 18 December 2014 (UTC))Reply

All right, I think I understand. Your English is good :) Kaixinguo (talk) 11:15, 19 December 2014 (UTC)Reply

I came across the term اولویت at Short Pages; if the term is real, what's the transliteration? --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 18:05, 18 December 2014 (UTC)Reply

P.S. Here's the category. --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 18:07, 18 December 2014 (UTC)Reply

Hi Irman! As a Steward I'm involved in the upcoming unification of all accounts organized by the Wikimedia Foundation (see m:Single User Login finalisation announcement). By looking at your account, I realized that you don't have a global account yet. In order to secure your name, I recommend you to create such account on your own by submitting your password on Special:MergeAccount and unifying your local accounts. If you have any problems with doing that or further questions, please don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Cheers, DerHexer (talk) 18:18, 14 January 2015 (UTC)Reply

Just so you know, this is how we format alternative forms on Wiktionary, so that all the information is located on the main lemma page. Thanks! —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 16:58, 25 March 2015 (UTC)Reply

سلام، من نتوانستم کلمهٔ فرنگ را در سفرنامه (ناصرخسرو) پیدا کنم. کجای سفرنامه است؟ واژه به چه صورتی آمده است، خودِ فرنگ؟ --Z 13:32, 6 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

سلام، راستش من خودم مطمئن نیستم ولی فکر می کنم در بخشی از سفرنامه که درس کتاب فارسی مدرسه بود یعنی در شرق مدیترانه اسم فرنگ آمده است . (Irman (talk) 06:02, 12 August 2015 (UTC))Reply

من متن آن را تقریباً یادم است. واژهٔ روم به کار رفته بود (واژهٔ فرسنگ هم زیاد به کار رفته بود، شاید با آن اشتباه گرفته باشیدش). در متن سفرنامه روی اینترنت هم یک جستجو انجام دادم چنین واژه‌ای نبود. پس به همان قبلی برمی‌گردانمش. --Z 07:41, 12 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

در سفر ناصر خسرو به طرابلس هست. (Irman (talk) 09:07, 12 August 2015 (UTC)) «...و باجگاهی است آن جا که کشتی های که از اطراف روم و فرنگ و اندلس و مغرب بیاید عشر به سلطان دهند...»Reply

اوه بله. من متن آن بخش از سفرنامه را اتفاقاً خیلی خوب یادم بود عجیب است که به این دقت نکرده بودم. نقل قول را الان می‌افزایم --Z 16:33, 12 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hi,

Could you please not capitalise Persian transliterations? --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 07:30, 5 September 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hi! although capitalisation does not exist in Perso-Arabic writing system but I think it is better to use in transliteration for whom prefers writing Persian in Latin Alphabet.(Irman (talk) 08:00, 5 September 2016 (UTC))Reply

It has been discussed several times and it was agreed that for languages where it's not standard to capitalise transliterations, eg Japanese rōmaji on proper nouns, there should be no capitalisation. This included Persian and regular editors of Persian. Persian and Hebrew are languages where some casual editors still continue doing it. There's no point really. Standard dictionaries and textbooks don't do it either. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 08:07, 5 September 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hi,

We're using "â" for the long "a", not "ā". As in WT:FA TR. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 02:35, 28 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

I prefer using "ā" instead. I think it is more appropriate for Persian transliteration and must be used in wiktionary too.(Irman (talk) 09:06, 28 November 2016 (UTC))Reply

There are many things we do like or dislike. Burmese speakers want to call their language "Myanmar". We have to follow the established rules. If a decision is made to change â->ā, then this can be done with a bot. Don't you agree. I'm not forcing my view but if you want to change the policy, try to change it in coordination with others. :) --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 10:07, 28 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

I will support switching to ā, in line with other Iranian languages, but Anatoli is right that this is a policy matter and should be discussed and agreed upon first. The current practice is the one shown at WT:FA TR. --Vahag (talk) 12:25, 28 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for your guidance.(Irman (talk) 21:06, 28 November 2016 (UTC))Reply

Hi,

Do you mind checking امتیاز and adding transliterations to the usage examples? --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 23:25, 3 December 2016 (UTC)Reply

Done.(Irman (talk) 18:26, 5 December 2016 (UTC))Reply

درود. دو پرسش داشتم

• اگر چند واژه به یک چم بودند آیا نمی‌بایست به گونه‌ای به هم ارتباط داده شوند؟ مثلا ریسیدن و تنیدن
• اگر یک واژه به دو گونه نوشته میشد باید چه کرد؟

Ms96 (talk) 19:20, 16 March 2017 (UTC)Reply

درود، ببخشید من منظور شما را متوجه نمی شوم

Ms96 (talk)مثلا بیختن همچنین به شکل ویختن هم نوشته می‌شود؛ باید دو صفحه جداگانه بسازیم یا در یک صفحه گفته شود این واژه به دو گونه نوشته می‌شود؟

خودم فهمیدم (: سپاس Ms96 (talk)

سلام, این واژه الف ندارد یا اینکه اشتباهی شده است؟ خواستم مطمئن شوم: --Z 12:51, 23 May 2017 (UTC)Reply

سلام، راستش خودم مطمئن نیستم ولی فکر کنم برگرفته از شیوه نگارش کتیبه ای باشد که الف را نمی نوشتند. شاید هم بشود آنرا فرهت خواند. بهر حال نام مشهوری است و احتمالاً همین درست است. (Irman (talk) 13:03, 23 May 2017 (UTC))Reply

بله در پارتی نبود الف قبل از نون پایانی که کاملا رایج است. من فقط خواستم مطمئن شود در منبعتان هم به همین گونه آمده است. --Z 13:14, 23 May 2017 (UTC)Reply

سلام. می‌توانید منبع این را همانجا ذکر کنید؟ فرهنگ معین سار را به معنی شتر آورده است اما نقل قولی ذکر نکرده. البته دهخدا هم چنین معنی‌ای برای سار نیاورده است. --Z 08:53, 8 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

سلام. من این معنی را خودم از ریشه تاریخی و جغرافیایی آن استنباط کردم. همانطور که اشاره کردید سار به معنی شتر اصلا در فارسی وجود نداشت پس طبیعتاً ساربان هم شتربان نمیشود و مشخص میشود که این معنی را فرهنگ نویسان از خود ابداع کردند. سار میتواند مخفف یا گونه از تلفظ سارت باشد. در ضمن هنوز در ازبکستان به غیر ترکها سارت می گویند که باید از زبان سغدی به جا مانده باشد.(Irman (talk) 09:11, 8 September 2017 (UTC))Reply

البته معنای «شتربان» برای ساربان جاافتاده است و در نقل قولی که الان از بیهقی اضافه کردم به نظرم فقط معنی شتربان می‌تواند بدهد. ممکن است معنی شتربان از معنای سرپرست کاروان مبدل شده باشد. --Z 09:32, 8 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

درست می فرمائید. به نظر میاید که معنی آن در گذر زمان تغییر کرده بوده باشد. احتمالاً به این خاطر که جز اول آن معنی اش فراموش شده بود.(Irman (talk) 09:45, 8 September 2017 (UTC))Reply

Hey, thanks for adding the transliterations, could you join the discussion at Etymology_scriptorium, there seem to be some indications that this word is of Arabic origin, could you defend (through arguments or sources) the claim of native Iranian origin? Crom daba (talk) 22:12, 25 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

سلام I started a thread about a page you created. I found the spelling تیراﮋه in this dictionary. So I think it would be inaccurate to say تیراﮋه is a misspelling. I went ahead and made this change. Please let me know if I did something incorrect. از کار شما اینجا خیلی متشکرم. Biosthmors (talk) 14:30, 5 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hi, Sorry for answering late! That is an obsolete word in Persian and I discovered that it had been recorded wrong in lexicons because of misreading of copiers so I correct it here for the fist time in the history of Persian language! (Irman (talk) 20:32, 23 February 2018 (UTC))Reply

Irman, if you're going to cite proto forms, you need to provide sources. Case in point, سخش, which strikes me as quite dubious, both morphologically and semantically. --Victar (talk) 18:43, 23 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

You are right! I am an experimental linguist :-) Thank you for correcting my mistake! (Irman (talk) 20:14, 23 February 2018 (UTC))Reply

what is your opinion on this word حاخشوک, I've restored it from جاخشوک.(Irman (talk) 20:51, 23 February 2018 (UTC))Reply

Source added. --Victar (talk) 21:35, 23 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

But that is semantically farther than what I had written there! seg- could be a etymological root for هاچه (hâče, “prop”)(Irman (talk) 21:50, 23 February 2018 (UTC))Reply

I recommend you read the source. Many reconstructions are possible, which is why you need older forms and cognates. --Victar (talk) 22:07, 23 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

I added my hypothesis again with yours as another possibility. (Irman (talk) 22:12, 23 February 2018 (UTC))Reply

I didn't think I would have to say this again, but please do not add proto etymologies without sources. --Victar (talk) 22:15, 23 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

Irman, please desist from adding spurious proto etymologies with no sources. They will be deleted. --Victar (talk) 13:49, 24 February 2018 (UTC)Reply

How do you allow yourself to delete my writings?! Get out of my page!(Irman (talk) 16:07, 24 February 2018 (UTC))Reply

Hello Irman, please could you add your opinion at https://en.wiktionary.orghttps://dictious.com/en/Wiktionary_talk:About_Persian#Finishing_transition_to_lower-case_Romanisations_for_proper_nouns as you are the only person with significant edits who hasn't offered an opinion. Thank you. Kaixinguo~enwiktionary (talk) 10:52, 12 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

Irman, you need to desist from adding such unsourced spurious Persian etymologies. Such edits are inappropriate on mainspace entries. You have been warned before and now risk a ban. --Victar (talk) 17:39, 24 October 2018 (UTC)Reply

Not only this, but I see that you are undoing perfectly good etymologies added by other users to replace them with your spurious ones, as you did at قیچی. This is not acceptable, and this is your final warning about such behaviour. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 14:42, 14 December 2018 (UTC)Reply

And following this warning, you undid my edit and continued to edit-war over it, without even responding or explaining. As a result, I have blocked you for two weeks. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 17:06, 14 December 2018 (UTC)Reply

Another patently spurious etymology by you. Please stop, or you will be permanently blocked. --Vahag (talk) 03:59, 9 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

I have given a month-long block due to this addition. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 05:25, 9 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

Note that Zamyat ii (talk • contribs) is a sock of Irman, @Metaknowledge. I see it from the kinds of entries added, and this time like before this account edits heavily right after a block of Irman. Fay Freak (talk) 09:37, 9 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

I hadn't known about this before, and I wish you had mentioned it. @Chuck Entz, can you please confirm? —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 14:49, 9 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

I hadn’t known it before either. Earlier when I looked at what this account does I thought it is one of Irman’s cronies from the same school or a parallel development (since we wit well already that there are many such people groomed in Iran). But now when this account popped up I looked again at the quality of its edits and I noticed certain labels, which made me wonder whose edits I was looking at. Then I looked if the editing dates coincide with Irman being blocked and the conclusion was done. On closer inspection I have even less doubt that this is Irman. It is all the same stale style. I even see it clearly after a night without sleep. Fay Freak (talk) 15:40, 9 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

If he did indeed circumvent the previous block using a sock, which I agree, certainly looks to be the case, based on the edit history, I think his current block should be extended. --{{victar|talk}} 01:13, 10 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

I think so. If you look at the edit histories, Zamyat ii made 2 edits in 2015 and 2 more in 2017. Irman was blocked for a month on January 15, and Zamyat ii came out of hibernation on January 19 and made dozens of edits until the day after Irman's block ended on February 15. Irman made 1 edit on February 15, then started up again on February 18. Irman was blocked on April 8, and Zamyat ii started editing again April 9. Irman's February 15 edit is the only one that's on the same day as any of Zamyat ii's edits (I have a gadget that changes everything to my time zone, so some of the dates may be off by a day). That should be enough by itself, but I can confirm that the two look identical checkuser-wise. Chuck Entz (talk) 04:51, 10 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

@Chuck Entz: Well, I've given both accounts indef blocks, and assuming your last sentence means you used the checkuser tool ("can" is a bit ambiguous), I hope you've saved the data, so we can catch Irman if he ever tries to return. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 05:10, 10 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

I can see double standard here, I can't uderstand why ridiculous Arabic and turkish etymologies without any logic and convincing source can exist but my original researches that are very logical are forbidden. (Irman (talk) 07:25, 10 April 2019 (UTC))Reply

Let's be clear: the indefinite block is because you used a second account and thus broke the rules. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 14:30, 10 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

I can see Fay Freak (talk • contribs) is reverting all my edits on persian one aftter another, that is so mean! (Irman (talk) 06:35, 11 April 2019 (UTC))Reply

@Metaknowledge, can I have a reduction and come back to editing someday?(Irman (talk) 17:02, 14 April 2019 (UTC))Reply

No. Read my last comment. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 17:42, 14 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

User Fay Freak (talk • contribs) frequently edits on Persian etymology section with ambiguous references, see this تکه, it is apparantly a native persian word cognate with hindi टुकड़ा. I feel Othomonists are allowed to make up their spurious etymologies but someone like me should be banned in so called "The Free Dictionary".(Irman (talk) 11:19, 19 April 2019 (UTC))Reply

You're banned because you broke the rules. If you keep pinging people to complain about their etymologies, I will also restrict you from talk page access. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 16:16, 20 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

Irman, {{etyl}} has long been discontinued. There are no longer any appropriate uses for it. Please instead use {{der}}, {{inh}}, and {{bor}}. Thanks. --{{victar|talk}} 08:17, 14 January 2019 (UTC)Reply

Irman, can I ask that you please add sources to the Persian entries you're addinging? It only take a few extra seconds to add {{R:fa:Dehkhoda:1931}}. Thanks. --{{victar|talk}} 00:52, 15 January 2019 (UTC)Reply

Irman, for Middle Persian entries, please use |tr= for transliterations, and |ts= for transcriptions, ex. {{m|pal|tr=sltk'|ts=sardag}}. Thanks. --{{victar|talk}} 02:11, 29 March 2019 (UTC)Reply

Tekke is a native Iranian word and it is cognate with Hindi टुकड़ा.(Irman (talk) 11:19, 19 April 2019 (UTC))Reply

@Calak, you reverted my edit on the etymology of وجب, do you have any reason to say that an incorrect etymology? I researched on the word and it seems no doutedly from middle persian baǰag means knuckle and that was a unit of measure, also it is cognate with persian وژول (vožul) and بجول (bojul), meaning "ankle". it has also an earlier form وژه (važa)--Irman (talk) 06:26, 20 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

How do you explain MP b > NP v? How about final -b from -g?--Calak (talk) 09:04, 20 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

I guess it's borrowed from a northern dialect perhaps Razi, which derivation of v from Middle Persian b could happen (compare Mazanderani vann- < Middle Persian band-, Mazanderani verin- < Middle Persian brīn-). The final b occured because of helping to faciliate the pronunciation of the word in colloquial usage.--Irman (talk) 10:14, 20 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

Persian vaǰab is cognate with Southern Kurdish wiža. In Southern Kurdish initial w- is always from MIr. w- (e.g SK. wark, MP. warrag); in this dialect initial w- from MIr. b- has no evidence so you theory is not right. Even Persian bâž and bojul should be from initial MIr. w- rather than b-.--Calak (talk) 12:04, 20 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

Southern Kurdish is heavily influenced by Persian, why don't you think wiža is a Persian loanword or maybe Fahlaviyat? initial v or w could be from Fahlaviyat like Persian باشه (bāše, “sparrowhawk”) and dialectal probably Fahlaviyat واشه (vāše, “sparrowhawk”). The MP word baǰag was a "unit of measure" equivalent of Greek κόνδυλος.--Irman (talk) 19:39, 20 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

A totally ridiculous etymology, both semantically and phonetically, and completely unsourced. He was right to revert it. --{{victar|talk}} 14:18, 20 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

(╯°□°）╯︵ ┻━┻--Irman (talk) 19:59, 20 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

@Metaknowledge, the Persian مه (meh, “fog”) is probably derived from Middle Persian *mēy. Some who doen't know about the language shouldn't be allowed to edit on the etymology of persian words.--Irman (talk) 08:43, 23 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

Is this a slight against me? *mēy probably existed as well, but it would have likely become *mēh, *meh already in MP, cf. MP zlyh, zlyd, zlydy (/⁠zrēh, zrēy⁠/, “sea, lake”) and plyh, plʾy (/⁠freh, frāy⁠/, “more”). --{{victar|talk}} 15:39, 23 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

Hello @Ariamihr! the Persian انگل (angal, “parasite”) must be related to Mazanderani هنگن (hangen, hangan, “bug”), and are both related to Manichaean Middle Persian hangan.--Irman (talk) 06:31, 3 May 2019 (UTC)Reply

@Ariamihr, the Middle Persian angubēn is from the proto-iranian compund word angu + bayna, the second element from proto-iranian *báynah and the first element should be related to انگم (angom, “resin”). Please notice that the Kurdish and Zazaki cognates are both dialectal variant of the Middle Persian and also the originality of Kurdish hing is doubtful.--Irman (talk) 06:56, 3 May 2019 (UTC)Reply

@Metaknowledge, you blocked my account permanantly without any precation! and I see every day someone reverts my edits on Persian etymology that I spend too much time and energy on them, this is extremely unfair! the User @Fay Freak reverted some of my edits, the last one is چنته, which I correctly put a right etymology on there, he/she changed it with a spurious etymology with a rare unknown Persian word tanče. The word چنته (čante, “sack”) is nodoubtedly a dialectal (perhaps influenced by the Turkic) form of unattested *جنته (jante), compare with Mazanderani جانتی (jāntey, “sack”). The Mazanderani word is a native word and now it is somewhat archaic but it shows the older spelling of the word atleast in northern dialects. One should consider changing initial ǰ to č could happen in Persian in variant dialects, another example of this is Persian چغ (čeğ, “a sort of screen made of split baeboo canes”), dialectal variant or probably Turkic influenced form of the Persian جگن (ǰagan, “sedge”), compare also the word آلاچیق (ālāčiq, “gazebo”) from Turkic meaning "tent", "yurt" (made of split bamboo canes). Please respond--Irman (talk) 04:21, 5 May 2019 (UTC)Reply

We also have Kurdish ǰāntā, ǰāntāy, ǰanta and ǰinta. Persian ǰ → č has evidence in Turkish, for example Turkish çift from Persian joft, Çıfıt from Persian jahud. --Calak (talk) 05:46, 5 May 2019 (UTC)Reply

I mistakenly pinged your name first, anyway thank you for your affirmation.--Irman (talk) 06:16, 5 May 2019 (UTC)Reply

Which would mean mean that the Persian is still from Turkish, even though when the Turkish is borrowed from a form with dž – maybe from Kurdish? I don’t know. tanče is what Nişanyan Sözlük derives from, and I applied this. Calak can maybe solve it better. But why is such a form *جنته (jante) unattested? If true it needs to be attested. See, that’s your problem, Irman. You always try to see things that aren’t there. You accuse me of putting a rare form whereas you put one that you have invented. Fay Freak (talk) 06:27, 5 May 2019 (UTC)Reply

how do you explain Mazanderani jāntey? I've just suggest Persian form by comparision with other Iranian words, Nishanyan is not a reliable source for referncing. You shouldn't revert or remove the others work without any permission you should only add your hypothesis there however I know some are more equal than others here and even have right to vandalize other users work without any consequences--Irman (talk) 07:36, 5 May 2019 (UTC)Reply

Fay Freak: With regard to Iranian ǰ → Turkish č, I think that Turkish çanta should be from Iranian ǰāntā, ǰanta rather than obsolete and dialectal Persian tanče. Evidently it is not from Persian, but from another Iranian language. We have these words in Kurdish: Northern Kurdish cente (“satchel, bag; purse”) (variants: çante, çente, çendik; under influence of Turkish?), Central Kurdish جانتا (canta, “bag, brief-case; портфе́ль, су́мка; чемода́н”), Southern Kurdish جانتا (canta), جانتای (cantay, “saddlebag; briefcase, handbag”), جِنتە (cinte, “briefcase, handbag”); also synonym Hawrami جانتا (ǰāntā). For second part (-ta), I don't know are Kurdish (تایێ شەکِر (tayê şekir, “a bag (half mule-load) of sugar”)) or Kurdish related or not.--Calak (talk) 12:05, 5 May 2019 (UTC)Reply

Yes @Calak, that seems better, though I don’t know how to explain these Iranian forms of course. Kurdish canta spawning Turkish çanta would be regular, and then regularly the Persian čante derives from the Turkish.

What is not said yet: If the Ottoman were a Persian borrowing, they would have kept it spelled چنته, but we always find چانطه, چانته. Also how I derived the Persian from Turkish: If the Ottoman چانطه (çanta) was from Persian چنته (čante), Nişanyan would not have failed to call it out so, right? But too easy, he didn’t. Argumentum a contrario: It isn’t from this Persian but the Persian is a recent Turkish borrowing. Is it even attested early, @Calak? I guess no, you will probably find witness statements about its intrusion from Turkey. Additionally I think Irman has not glossed the Persian word faithfully but it means a handbag of today’s women and a suitcase, a meaning developed in Turkish, through the Turks developing modern business manners under European influence, so it is likely a priori that the Persian is from Turkish at least semantically, but especially since this Turkish word is so widely borrowed into languages around it. You should considered a regloss, Calak, “sack” does not correspond to the images I see.

As I said, Calak, I don’t know how you derive the Kurdish, but you should add the correspondences you have discovered to چانطه (çanta). Not a bad etymology, Irman, huh? Why lose your composure? Speaking of vandalization and calling Nişanyan unreferenceable here is vile and an insult to such a great man. We are all improving the etymologies. No permission needed: That’s the Wiki spirit, Irman. Just think the things through scrupulously. Fay Freak (talk) 14:31, 5 May 2019 (UTC)Reply

Fay Freak: Persian čanta is a Turkish borrowing; its entry in Dehkhoda dictionary has no evidence from Classical Persian. The problem is etymology of Turkish čanta and theirs Iranian cognates with ǰ-.--Calak (talk) 16:53, 6 May 2019 (UTC)Reply

Turkish serçe is from Persian سارچه (sārče, “(literally) little starling”).--Irman (talk) 11:03, 7 May 2019 (UTC)Reply

hereš in colloquial Persian means "stage", "phase".--Irman (talk) 13:30, 8 May 2019 (UTC)Reply

@Calak, Persian یورش is not a borrowing from Othoman.--Irman (talk) 13:53, 8 May 2019 (UTC)Reply

So which Turkic language is it from? For it is based on a pan-Turkic root see yürümek. If you think otherwise you should read Doerfer, which you should do anyway for your own therapy. There are yet thousands of Turkic and Mongolic words in Persian to list. Oh, and a tip: Why don’t you learn a Turkic language in the free time you have now? Being only an Iran man is quite narrow-minded and leaves you trapped. Fay Freak (talk) 20:02, 8 May 2019 (UTC)Reply

How ignorant you are! I just said it is not a borrowing from ottoman turkish because there is no reason for that when there are millions of turks live in Iran. For your information I am interested in romance languages and I know a little French, Italian and spanish and I am continuing to learn them. your way of speaking to me shows you are suffering from a complex.--Irman (talk) 05:47, 9 May 2019 (UTC)Reply

Yes, it's called Irman-itis. XD But in all seriousness, unless you can provide sources for your assertions, you've really run out our trust in your etymologies. --{{victar|talk}} 09:08, 9 May 2019 (UTC)Reply

Arabic وسادة is apparantly from Middle Persian wisādan "to rest".--Irman (talk) 05:45, 13 May 2019 (UTC)Reply

No one ever said in Iran "Armenian bread" to lavaš, that is a blatant lie from Ačaṙean.--Irman (talk) 06:03, 13 May 2019 (UTC)Reply

Did you know the real reason behind the Battle of Avarayr was the ownership of lavash? --Vahag (talk) 09:11, 13 May 2019 (UTC)Reply

So what? what can you prove by that?--Irman (talk) 09:40, 13 May 2019 (UTC)Reply

We won, therefore lavash is Armenian. You can have sangak. --Vahag (talk) 10:34, 13 May 2019 (UTC)Reply

No, you defeated at that battle, the Lavash bread is Iranian . Did you know Armenia was part of Iran until 1828?--Irman (talk) 10:49, 13 May 2019 (UTC)Reply

That's because you had elephants. Anyone can win with elephants. According to a legend, Armenians invented the flat lavash to secretly pass food under the prison door of Arshak II, whom you treacherously imprisoned in Khuzestan. --Vahag (talk) 11:07, 13 May 2019 (UTC)Reply

That's a total myth. You should know Lavash is older than Sangak, it is made in every part of Iran, even by nomads. How can Iranian nomads of Southern Zagros recieved it from Armenians?--Irman (talk) 11:30, 13 May 2019 (UTC)Reply

Ačaṙean must go to trial for fraud. He told a lie about hearing people in Tehran say Armenian bread to Lavash which this claim probably made UNESCO in mistake in recognising the place of origin.--Irman (talk) 11:38, 13 May 2019 (UTC)Reply

@Calak, you are right! as you mentioned , Persian امرود is from Old Iranian amra-vat- cognate with Sanskrit amla. I found Transoxianan Persian غمروات meaning "quince", but probably recorded with misspelling. The first letter must have been ع, it was common at that time to write عین instead of الف and it should be read as amravāt.--Irman (talk) 05:52, 16 May 2019 (UTC)Reply

@Metaknowledge, @Fay Freak, @Vahagn Petrosyan Yet another rubbish again! the Persian word تپانچه is from the verb تپیدن (tapidan, “to beat”), تپاندن (tapāndan, “to cause to beat; to cram, stuff”) (probably from the same root as English stop). This word has existed in Persian since 10th CE, also we have never in Persia used ottoman literature so how the fuck can an ottoman word enter to Persian. Reversely, it can be get result that the Turkish word is a derivation from Persian with slightly changing the meaning:

Turkic taban backformation of tabanca from Persian tapānče.

--Irman (talk) 10:03, 5 June 2019 (UTC)Reply

You may like it or not but the Proto-Turkic is a joke.--Irman (talk) 10:34, 5 June 2019 (UTC)Reply

Turkic kavun is probably a backformation of *kavuncuk, from Transoxianan Persian کاونجک (kāvanǰak, “muskmelon”), related to Persian کاواک (kāvāk, “hollow”).--Irman (talk) 16:46, 5 June 2019 (UTC)Reply

Absolutely ridiculous etymology, and symptomatic for a pertinacious aberration. A word for “hollow” does not become a word for “melon” by all probabilities. And why is it Transoxianan only? Because it is from Turkic. Fay Freak (talk) 17:05, 5 June 2019 (UTC)Reply

there is an apparent relation between sense hollow and the shape of the melon have you ever seen a melon in your life?--Irman (talk) 17:09, 5 June 2019 (UTC)Reply

I have, and in no context they are hollow. Fay Freak (talk) 17:34, 5 June 2019 (UTC)Reply

You haven't seen I am sure. you can search on google images an see inside of the fruit. however the plant breeding and modern transgenics could affect the shape of it but no doubt it was hollower in ancient times than what we see now.--Irman (talk) 17:50, 5 June 2019 (UTC)Reply

Now I have done an image search just for you. They do not look hollow. Of course, because fruits without pericarp do not make sense. Fay Freak (talk) 18:33, 5 June 2019 (UTC)Reply

you added an spurious etymology on Persian کاونجک and nobody prevent you to do that because the wiktionary mafia likes the ottoman slaves very much--Irman (talk) 18:27, 5 June 2019 (UTC)Reply

What a totally ludicrous etymology. Next time you want to peddle you crackpot theories, include sources to the effect, otherwise, as @Metaknowledge say above, you're close to getting your talk page shut down as well. --{{victar|talk}} 18:19, 5 June 2019 (UTC

Seems I am talking to one person with many accounts.--Irman (talk) 18:24, 5 June 2019 (UTC)Reply

I hate this wiktionary, I do not have trust it anymore. It is full of lies and supporting the liars.--Irman (talk) 18:30, 5 June 2019 (UTC)Reply

Proto-turkic *qagun?!!! hahaha that is bullshit.--Irman (talk) 18:43, 5 June 2019 (UTC)Reply

It is Transoxianan only because Tranoxiana and especially city of Merv was capital of Persian literature and exactly the origin of Persian language before Mongol invasion and massacre of the whole people there.--Irman (talk) 17:15, 5 June 2019 (UTC)Reply

• Despite my warnings, you have continued to ping people on your talk page and rudely dispute their entries based on your pseudoscientific beliefs. Additionally, you have created another sockpuppet that I had to block. As a result, I have taken away your access to your talk page. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 21:46, 5 June 2019 (UTC)Reply

RMaung (WMF) 14:32, 9 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

RMaung (WMF) 19:13, 20 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

RMaung (WMF) 17:03, 4 October 2019 (UTC)Reply