Wiktionary > Discussion rooms > Etymology scriptorium Shortcuts: WT:ES WT:RFE WT:ES redirects here. For help with edit summaries, see Help:Edit summary...
18:50, 4 January 2023 (UTC) Do we even have an entry for that word ? Leasnam (talk) 18:52, 4 January 2023 (UTC) https://en.wiktionary...
all. - -sche (discuss) 01:29, 12 June 2023 (UTC) Discussion moved from Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2023/May#PIE *méh₂trih₂ks actually from *méh₂tēr...
The Wiktionary entry for θερμός contains the expanded list of cognates (https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/θερμός). 38.15.208.251 09:46, 14 February 2023 (UTC)...
Could the Etymology Scriptorium be divided up on a per-language basis, or have a "URL-based search" function? So that a URL like "en.wiktionary...
Thanks for providing etymological notes! Chernorizets (talk) 10:27, 11 August 2023 (UTC) See also Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2023/July#шикалка, for...
actually form trinary + digit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ternary_numeral_system JMGN (talk) 21:59, 1 September 2023 (UTC) I guess it should be interpreted...
2A00:20:604A:E02:B11:2D2D:EA8E:3F01 14:36, 10 June 2023 (UTC) Discussion moved to Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2023/June#PIE *méh₂trih₂ks actually from *méh₂tēr...
14:22, 13 October 2023 (UTC) here's the link to the May 2019 discussion https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Wiktionary:Etymology_scriptorium...
Cheers, --CopperKettle (talk) 04:22, 4 April 2023 (UTC) https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Khorramshahr#Etymology KLUGE : Etymologisches Wörterbuch der Deutsche...
Wiktionary > Discussion rooms > Etymology scriptorium
WT:ES redirects here. For help with edit summaries, see Help:Edit summary. For information about Spanish entries on Wiktionary, see Wiktionary:About Spanish.
Welcome to the Etymology scriptorium. This is the place to cogitate on etymological aspects of the Wiktionary entries.
The entry for French comment itself states that the second syllable is the French suffix -ment. However, the entry for comme states that the second syllable of comment is the conjunction et. (Both entries agree that the first syllable of comment is comme.)
Bizarrely, both claims are cited to the same work. This can't be right. What's going on? 71.198.233.25 12:15, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
The second element of comme (not of comment) is etymologically et. That is, Latin quomo(do) + et > French comme, also Italian come. To that combination was later added the adverbial suffix -ment in French, hence comment. Nicodene (talk) 21:25, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
In that case, the entry for comme appears to be clearly wrong? It says " 71.198.233.25 12:18, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
"Later the conjunction et was added to com, resulting in comment." This is very explicit and directly contradicts what you're saying here. Perhaps it should be changed? 71.198.233.25 12:20, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
Sorted. Nicodene (talk) 21:01, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
Does anyone know or have any ideas on where this word came from? Could it possibly be related to grievous? Cheebow8 (talk) 16:53, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
Let's take a step back. Does an adjective *grovious even exist? Nicodene (talk) 21:27, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
You're right about the smudged E's, and thus, the word never existed. How can its deletion occur with haste? Cheebow8 (talk) 23:37, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
Probably the fastest way would be replacing my {{rfd}} with a simple {{d}}. Nicodene (talk) 03:29, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ Deleted as an entry created in error. — Sgconlaw (talk) 04:49, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
According to the entry for Spanish proteles, "From New Latin proteles, from Ancient Greek πρῶτος (prôtos) + τέλειος (téleios)."
Are we sure this is the right etymology? Seraphinanewt (talk) 17:23, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
Certainly the Spanish name comes from the genus name Proteles. w:Aardwolf § Etymology, citing Grzimek's Encyclopedia of Mammals, says this comes from πρῶτος (prôtos) + τέλειος (téleios), but one would expect that to give *Prototelius or the like. Merriam-Webster, on the other hand, gives the more plausible etymology προ- (pro-) + -τελής (-telḗs), and in fact there is an Ancient Greek word προτελής (protelḗs). Unfortunately, it's an adjective meaning "offered before a wedding ceremony" (referring to an animal sacrifice) and has nothing to do with aardwolves or hyenas at all. But it's possible some Enlightenment-era biologist re-coined pro-teles to mean "complete in front", possibly without even knowing the original Greek word (which is a rather obscure hapax legomenon). —Mahāgaja · talk 19:23, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
I cant find this word on the web except in dictionaries. merriam-webster 1913 defines it very similarly to the more common word melinite, except that it derives it from Greek méli "honey" instead of mēlinos "quince-colored". mel-enite would be quite a weird derivation from méli and melinite definitely looks more like quinces than honey, so I would assume that melenite is just a misidentification of melinite; could we just make it an alternative form entry of melinite? Anatol Rath (talk) 10:33, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
I was curious about the name, and went digging. w:Jean_Sibelius#Life says it a Latinization of Sibbe, a family estate. This turns out to be Sibbo (Swedish) or w:Sipoo (Finnish), which are pet-forms of Sigfrid, w:Sigfrid of Sweden being the patron saint. 24.108.18.81 04:56, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
{{R:fi:SPNK}} derives the personal name Sibbe not from Sigfrid but from Old Swedish Sighbjörn (> modern rare Sigbjörn). --Tropylium (talk) 10:57, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
Could Russian разре́з ("cut, section") be from Proto-Slavic *rězati ("to cut, slice")? Seraphinanewt (talk) 13:36, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
@Seraphinanewt Added the etymology. Vininn126 (talk) 13:38, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Tea room? Seraphim. 2607:FB90:3529:365:747C:B7FF:FE06:42ED 01:29, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
The following entries need fixing, I don't like the * in the etymology section
links to *eggle
with *voicen P. Sovjunk (talk) 17:35, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
These seem fine to me. What's bothering you about them? —Caoimhin ceallach (talk) 17:02, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
I agree it's weird to provide a link to Reconstruction:English/voicen, as it is not really a reconstructed form. It's not like we believe that voicen formerly existed or currently exists but happens to be unattested. It's different with *eggle; since eggler and eggling themselves are archaic, it is possible that eggle existed at the time but isn't attested. —Mahāgaja · talk 17:34, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
I'm agnostic about whether *voicen exists but happens to be unattested. If you think it exists, writing "*voicen" is the correct way if saying so. If you don't, then we need a better account of the form voicening. Perhaps it arose in analogy to words like softening, lengthening. —Caoimhin ceallach (talk) 18:01, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
I do think analogy is a better explanation, especially using lengthening since length and voice are both nouns (length : lengthening :: voice : X = voicening). I'm tempted to just call it a mistake as the actual word is voicing. —Mahāgaja · talk 20:06, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
I agree with Mahagaja. I have also labelled it nonstandard, and would consider labelling it a non-native speakers' error (most of the hits seem to be by non-native speakers) or even a misspelling (one work does use "voicening" multiple times, but others use it only once and otherwise consistently use "voicing"). - -sche (discuss) 15:00, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure the term is ultimately related to German kacken, but I'm not sure whether bekackte or bekackt are a match semantically since we don't have those entries. Could a German speaker give their input? Maybe @Fay Freak, Jberkel. Ioaxxere (talk) 18:00, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
Added the entries, the adjective is quite common, not so much in print. Jberkel 18:40, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
An alternative form, becacked, also exists. I've added it. Leasnam (talk) 22:51, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
I'm finding cites for becack'd dating back to 1711; and it seems this is a tense of the verb becack (“to cover or smear with cack (shite)”), which goes back in English to 1598; so the German may merely be a cognate. Leasnam (talk) 22:54, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
Based on the spelling of becocked I would say this was indeed from Yiddish/German. I'll create a separate entry for becacked. Leasnam (talk) 23:04, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
Then there's cacked up, which seems to be closer to this than plain cacked.Chuck Entz (talk) 02:29, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Thanks everyone! Ioaxxere (talk) 15:45, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
When is Palestine (in any pronunciation) first attested in English? On the citations page, I put a use from 1650, but I can find French books using it even earlier. I can find some modern books which imply the term existed in Middle English: did it, in some spelling?
What's the history of the pronunciation /ˈpæləˌstiːn/ used for some US places named Palestine? Was it formerly also used for the pronunciation of the Middle Eastern area?
- -sche (discuss) 22:36, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
It's attested in Old English as Palestina. Leasnam (talk) 22:48, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
The MED doesn't have an entry for it, but under Jeuerī(e n. 2.a it has a quote: (a1398) *Trev.Barth.(Add 27944)166a/b : "Samaria is a cuntre of palestyne and..is to Jewriward [L iudee vicina]." Chuck Entz (talk) 01:00, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Thank you both; I've add those missing links between the Latin and modern English to our entry. Interestingly, the 1909 OED does not have either Palestine (which tracks, because it seems to exclude placenames, e.g. it has Panama only as the attributive for things relating to Panama) or Palestinian (for reasons unclear to me, as they have e.g. Peruvian), and Etymonline, perhaps because it draws on the OED, therefore claims the term was "revived" by the British in 1920, but this must be wrong given all the use before 1900. - -sche (discuss) 14:49, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
For the pronunciation, so far what I've found is /aɪ/. Baldwin's 1851 Geographical Pronunciation has Pal'es-tīne, and though he never explains his notation beyond saying ī is "long" (ambiguous as some people use that to mean /iː/ and some to mean /aɪ/, and the other words he notates with -tīne have both, e.g. Argentine), Goodrich's 1856 Pronouncing and Defining Dictionary of the English uses "ī" here but in other words, which have /i(ː)/, uses the respelling "ee", which means I take their "long i" to mean the diphthong rather than a long i. And Funk and March's 1897 Standard Dictionary of the English Language confirm, respelling it "pal'es-tain". I wonder if the US pronunciation is a spelling pronunciation by the original settlers, a vowel shift that happened over time, or a shift that made to distinguish it from the Middle Eastern place. I spot a Jewish News Syndicate article asserting Today's residents pronounce East Palestine “Palesteen,” but the original settlers undoubtedly pronounced it the more common way. but if that's based on anything other than gut feeling or guesswork, they don't seem to cite it. - -sche (discuss) 14:56, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
@-sche: my understanding is that there was a lag between migration to those areas and the setting up of schools, so most of the early population would have been farmers with no formal education. Under such circumstances, if it wasn't in the Bible or a few other sources that were commonly available they would have had to figure out for themselves how such vocabulary would be pronounced- so my money is on spelling pronunciation. This isn't the first such ad-hoc-sounding pronunciation of a small town named after a well known place that I've encountered, but I can't think of another one off the top of my head. Chuck Entz (talk) 21:27, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
@-sche: Is it possible that the US place names are conserving a pre-Great Vowel Shift pronunciation? Maybe the original settlers were from Northern England or Scotland. But if I had to guess I would say that /iː/ is a spelling pronunciation. Palestine was probably a very obscure word prior to c. 1900 so I doubt the pronunciation was even consistent. Ioaxxere (talk) 15:45, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
@-sche: The current version of OED Online only lists attributive uses of the word. However, it notes in the etymology that Palestine as a place name is found from Late Middle English onwards; before that, as Leasnam pointed out, the Latinate form Palestina was used. — Sgconlaw (talk) 20:50, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Origin? 90.241.192.210 15:13, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Added @līso. Leasnam (talk) 17:31, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
No article on līsī yet, 90.241.192.210 21:36, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
For OHG no, but please see Proto-West Germanic *līs(ī) Leasnam (talk) 22:29, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Is it related to Russian перемена? Shoshin000 (talk) 16:04, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Despite the rather detailed information already present, which is generally well done (I'd change a few stylistic things but w/e), I marked this with {{etystub}} because I'm seeing a lot of conflicting information.
When checking Polish dictionaries, Boryś and Mańczak both claim this is internal derivation, ultimately from the same etymon (nagrodzić). The shift of grodzić > nagrodzić is baffling me a bit, but I think {{R:pl:WSEHJP}} might give some explanation. Bańkowski seems to waver, he says it seems somewhat like Proto-Slavic, but as we can see a lot of forms might be borrowings. Furthermore, the earliest attestastion for Polish is 16th century, so Middle Polish, which while possible for some inherited terms, does reduce the chances. @AshFox @IYI681 and @Sławobóg, input requested! Vininn126 (talk) 15:37, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
Just for information, Old Ruthenian нагрода (nahroda) is first attested in 1614. AshFox (talk) 16:02, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
That would certainly point to a Middle Polish, in my opinion. Especially with the sound laws. So that seems solid. Vininn126 (talk) 16:06, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
It is possible that it is an internal post Proto-Slavic derivation. Back when I created the page, I didn't take EssJa into consideration, a mistake on its own, it's not listed there, so that lends credibility to it. IYI681 (talk) 16:05, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
I've updated the Polish entry nagroda for now - someone let me know if something looks wrong. Vininn126 (talk) 18:37, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
I also saw that the paragraph in the reconstruction is now handled by the Russian etymology. My intention is that it should be clearer now, there's no need to have it twice. Vininn126 (talk) 18:53, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
One thing that could be could is moving the semantic shift information from the Polish entry to the PS entry, if that's something we believe. Vininn126 (talk) 18:56, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
Origins of Dutch/German word? 90.241.192.210 17:12, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
Will someone respond? 193.39.158.203 14:00, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
Etymologies added. —Caoimhin ceallach (talk) 12:57, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
At present English quad is divided into four etymologies, but one is dubious and the other three are all rather similar.
In 2016 @Equinox changed Etymology 1 from "pertaining to 4" to "Latin". While quattuor is Latin for 4, and these English words are at least indirectly related to it, I don't know that they come directly from Latin and not from, say Italian quattro, Old French quatre, or even other English words such as quartet or the like.
Etymology 2 is given as "Clippings" (of various English words), while Etymology 3 is "Abbreviation" (of two English words). Is it fair to say that e.g. quad from quad bike is an abbreviation and not a clipping, while the opposite is true of quadcopter? Maybe so, but they are pretty similar. Likewise, while Etymology 4 is specifically from quadrat, it is shortened from that word, or in the words of the OED, "Formed within English, by clipping or shortening. Shortened < quadrat n. (originally as a graphic abbreviation)" (emphasis added). Maybe all of these senses should be grouped by the word they are clipped / abbreviated / shortened from (per Etymology 4)? Or would that just create an excess of sections with one or two senses each?
Fun fact: quad from quadrat is the oldest Latin-related (probably via French or Italian) quad in the OED (c. 1781), but there are three homographs from Old English: variants of hwæt (what), cwæþ (quoth, said), and cwead (excrement). Cnilep (talk) 06:11, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
The words in Etymology 1 are all likely to be clippings of quadruple or quadruplet in my opinion. —Mahāgaja · talk 08:29, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
I doubt that there are any definitions of quad as an adjective that attestably meet the requirements to be considered adjectives, rather than attributive use of a noun. Some may not be attestable at all. DCDuring (talk) 18:05, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
Here's what I'm thinking: put these into a single etymology section and organize them chronologically, mentioning the (known or probable) English etymon in the definition. The etymology would be something like, "Shortened, via clipping or abbreviation, from various English terms. Ultimately related to Latin quattuor “4”. See quadri-, quadruple." Then noun glosses would be something like:
(typography) Originally abbreviation of obsolete quadrat. [from 1780s]
A blank metal block used to fill short lines of type.
(slang) A joke used to fill time.
(phototypesetting and digital typesetting) A keyboard command which aligns text with the left or right margin.
(colloquial) A quadrangle, a square courtyard. [from 1780s]
(colloquial) A horse, from colloquial or humorous quadruped specifically for horse. [from 1850s]
[…]
Opinions? Cnilep (talk) 02:18, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
This seems sensible to me. If necessary any relatively long information like what is present about the typography senses can still be in the etymology, introduced like "The typography senses are from..." or something. - -sche (discuss) 02:50, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
Done ―Cnilep (talk) 03:13, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
A suggested etymology is Phoenician 𐤏𐤋𐤉𐤑 𐤏𐤁𐤀 (ʿlyṣ ʿbʾ /ʿaliṣ-ʿuboʾ/, “safe harbour”), but I can't find such words anywhere...any Phoenician specialists out there who can testify to ʿaliṣ-ʿuboʾ? I would like to propose another solution, but I'd like to hear from the experts first. 24.108.18.81 16:01, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
I have come across ܒܐ (ʿubbā), which might be interpreted as "harbour". עלי could be translated as "superior", but the "s" is still a problem. 24.108.18.81 19:01, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
The Celts were early established here, so I would like to suggest Proto-Celtic *lussus (“medicinal herb, vegetable”) + Proto-Celtic *bonus (“base”), the Welsh equivalent being llys (“plant”) + bôn (“base”). Thus "settlement with medicinal herbs". This would also fit with the name Lisso/Lucio once given to the River Tagus. Any thoughts? 24.108.18.81 15:13, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
I have posted this, I will be interested in any comments. 24.108.18.81 19:46, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
I appload your creativity. Unfortunately, these kind of theories are almost always wrong. It is extremely speculative and there is no indication whatsoever that it may be true. At least for "safe harbour" we can say that, indeed, Lisbon was built on the location of a safe harbour ("safe" as in "sheltered"). The word *lussus isn't attested in any other place name or personal name. The element *bonus is more promising as there are lots of such placenames attested. On the other hand, we're not even sure the area was Celtic. The biggest problem is that *lussu-bonus doesn't account for the classical name Olisīpō (and similar) at all. The only sounds that match are l and s. The sounds O, i, ī, p, and ō don't. The declension type is also wrong: u-stem vs. n-stem. —Caoimhin ceallach (talk) 20:42, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
Wikipedia shows the coast as occupied by Celts. As to -ppo, the Romans could have mistaken -bon for a third declension noun like Cato. 24.108.18.81 15:52, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
Please don't add your own original research to our etymology entries. Brusquedandelion (talk) 15:52, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
Looking through this editor's other contributions, I notice that while some (especially minor changes, linking, etc) look fine, many of the substantive additions have been reverted by more knowledgeable users. IP, please be more careful. - -sche (discuss) 16:13, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
How do people feel about this? I was under the impression that we do normally include macrons when mentioning Latin words in etymologies, and that we try to use more specific templates than {{der}} when possible. (OTOH the "possibly" Gluepix added and P Aculeius removed does indeed seem to be unneeded.) Is there a better template than {{lbor}}? - -sche (discuss) 02:47, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
We absolutely use macrons when mentioning Latin words in etymologies, translation sections, or anywhere at all really. Our entry aborigines#Latin says that the derivation from ab origine is a folk etymology, so that "possibly" should probably be replaced with a "not". —Mahāgaja · talk 12:01, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
OK. I've opted to just direct people (from both this capitalized entry and English aborigines) to the Latin entry, so as to only have to hash out the ety in one place; apparently it's unclear whether it's a folk ety. - -sche (discuss) 14:51, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
Do you know the origin of this Indonesian word? Or at least you have a theory about it. Berbuah salak (talk) 23:25, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
The second syllable seems to derive from Arabic غُلّ (ḡull). Not sure about the front part, but the full word could be a corrupted form of the phrase bi l-ḡull. Austronesier (talk) 17:11, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
Does anybody know the origin of this German word? 90.241.192.210 20:10, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Added. Fay Freak (talk) 21:40, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
@Lambiam, Lingo Bingo Dingo, Thadh, Mnemosientje: Nl.wikt says this is a borrowing from Low German. Is it a doublet of onbeschaafd? PUC – 19:59, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
The dominant hypothesis is that it is an alteration of onbeschaafd, but other theories have been advanced. I don’t know what the concrete evidence is that this is a Low German term. Clearly, onbeschaafd is on- + the past participle of the verb schaven. Is there a Low German counterpart schoffen? --Lambiam 10:42, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
This hypothesis seems preferred by Van der Sijs. [1] ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk) 20:40, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
Apparently a Low German word unbeschuft has been recorded. But how can we be sure this was not borrowed from Dutch? --Lambiam 08:08, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
The protist Ancistrum is the type genus of the family Ancistridae. But the meaning of Ancistrum is not clear. I believe it derives from the ancient Greek ἀγκιστρεύω / ankistrévo, "fish hook". Do you have another opinion on the matter? Gerardgiraud (talk) 18:42, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
The most likely source would be Ancient Greek ἄγκιστρον (ánkistron, “fish hook”) (Latin -um and Ancient Greek -ον are closely related). Ancient Greek ἀγκιστρεύω (ankistreúō) is a verb derived from the noun. Chuck Entz (talk) 18:55, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
See the original description, which says "(du grec ἀγκίστρον, crampon.)". Apparently the Ancient Greek term could also refer to other types of hooks. Chuck Entz (talk) 21:08, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
plima (плима) from root -pl cognate with плно (old serbian dialects), cognate with plus (latin), πολύς (old greek) 109.245.206.52 15:27, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
I want to know the origin of this Dutch suffix. 90.241.192.210 20:51, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
While I don't know the answer, it is undoubtedly cognate to the German suffix -ste. --Lambiam 04:55, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
It's actually an interesting question, because the only form at CAT:Proto-Germanic ordinal numbers with an st in the suffix is *furistaz (“first”), which etymologically is the superlative suffix equivalent to ‑est. I suppose in Dutch and German it was reinterpreted as an ordinal suffix and spread to all the numbers ending in ‑zig/‑tig as well as hundert/honderd, tausend/duizend, and all the big numbers ending in -illion. —Mahāgaja · talk 06:20, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
Update: I'm aware that the German and Dutch words for 'first' actually come from Proto-West Germanic *airist, but as that also ends in the superlative suffix, my point stands. —Mahāgaja · talk 11:21, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
Could *gurą be derived not from *gʷʰer- "hot", but *ǵʰer- "bowels, intestines"?
It seems to be closer semantically.
I guess the morphology is PIE added -om (in zero-grade?). Aspets (talk) 19:15, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
That does indeed seem more likely. Especially if the correct form of the latter root is *ǵʰerH-, which I believe. —Caoimhin ceallach (talk) 14:32, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
It might seem more likely, but I think the connection to *gʷʰer- is probably accurate. Polish 'gorący' from Psl. *gorǫťь is almost certainly cognate and retains an identical semantic meaning the original PIE root. Most descendants of ǵʰer- describe human anatomy or some sort of tube, not the contents within. I think that if we were looking at a *hypothetical* Pgmc. *gurǫ̂ "of the intestines", then it might be a better case. Liminal Thulean (talk) 21:56, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
I saw a youtuber with a pretty high following suggesting that this is the root word for the english word "wrist".
I understand that wrist has a completely different etymology, and he's obviously wrong, but I'm curious. Could help prevent linguistic disinformation. 117.219.31.229 11:45, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
So, to fill the empty Arabic etymology section, I pulled an explanation out of my sleeves for the internet users. After deriving roots from other roots for over half a decade now, it was intuitive to me. Fay Freak (talk) 12:30, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
Origin? There is no Middle German entry for māwen yet 90.241.192.210 18:59, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
I'd say it's onomatopoetic, obviously. Wakuran (talk) 22:24, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
The Middle High German is mouen. mawen is Middle Low German. Etymology has been corrected and expanded. Leasnam (talk) 23:42, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
This word looks like a native word, but I don't know the etymology. Do you know the etymology? Or at least have a theory about it. Berbuah salak (talk) 14:02, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
@Berbuah salak: I have added a "shallow" etymology. The term is shared between Malay/Indonesian, Sundanese and Javanese, but fortunately, the devoicing of the final stop makes the direction of borrowing obivous at least for Malay. I'm undecided about Sundanese or Javanese as source. In the case of Jav → Snd, Snd would have neutralized the Jav dental–postalveolar contrast; in the case of Snd → Jav, the default nativization is Snd ⟨d⟩ → Jav ⟨dh⟩ in non-final and Snd ⟨d⟩ → Jav ⟨d⟩ in final position. So both scenarios are likely. As for the "deep" etymology, I have no idea about it yet. –Austronesier (talk) 11:58, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
Lacks an etymology and I am thinking this may be a germanic loan. Pgm. *Skellanan perhaps from Old Norse "skjalla" or Old English "scillan"? Seems to be basically synonymous with Irish / Gàidhlig "fuaim" but This word is apparently not found in Irish. Liminal Thulean (talk) 11:42, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
You're probably right. Old Norse skjalla seems the more likely source, as Old English scillan was pronounced with a /ʃ/. Still, I'd expect the form to be *sgeal, not sgal. —Caoimhin ceallach (talk) 14:14, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
On a side note, it is skyawl, skyaul, skyowl in Scots. Leasnam (talk) 04:17, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
Origin? 85.255.234.172 12:31, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Added. —Caoimhin ceallach (talk) 13:41, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
On a possibly related note, I see that Dutch uses "hen" as a gender-neutral pronoun, like Swedish and Norwegian. Would that be a borrowing from Swedish or Finnish, or is it an independent development? (It might be national pride, but I find it a much better word than the occasionally confusing singular they that's predominantly used in English...) Wakuran (talk) 20:03, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
I'm not well-informed about 3sg gender-neutral pronouns in Dutch. I don't recall ever hearing them in use. They certainly haven't gained traction the way they have in Sweden. According to Genderneutrale_voornaamwoorden#Nederlands this usage of hen is inspired by English they, although unlike English there is no history of the use of plural pronouns in the singular and in Dutch you're also supposed to use a singular verb with singular hen. —Caoimhin ceallach (talk) 12:59, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
As far as I know, singular they was never used to address individuals in the history of English, either. It's just an indirect, impersonal usage that has been reinterpreted, anyway. Wakuran (talk) 13:44, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
"to address individuals" is not the right choice of words in any case, unless you're talking about expression like "You there!", so I'm not sure what you mean. My understanding was that "they" could always be used to refer to a specific person of unknown or contextually irrelevant gender which to the best of my knowledge is impossible in Dutch. —Caoimhin ceallach (talk) 16:10, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
I meant that the historic usage was indirect and impersonal (or rather indefinite, I guess). The usage of singular they to refer to a specific person, often by individual choice, is recent. As the usage is modern already in English, it's no real argument for why it couldn't be borrowed into Dutch. [2] Wakuran (talk) 23:24, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
The point of the comparison to English was that the shift for English was small, as it already had singular they in certain cases, and therefore easier to overcome when compared to the shift for Dutch, which never had singular hen/hun/ze/etc. in any case. —Caoimhin ceallach (talk) 23:54, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
I don't fully agree, but let's agree to disagree, I guess. Wakuran (talk) 10:06, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
Alright. —Caoimhin ceallach (talk) 10:16, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
This article says Swedish inspired it, as you suggested. —Caoimhin ceallach (talk) 16:38, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
Okay, thanks. The phonetic connection to 'hun' might have played a part as well, it seems. (Such as in how Swedish 'hen' was partially borrowed from Finnish 'hän', but reinterpreted in analogy with 'han' and 'hon'.) Wakuran (talk) 23:24, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
Which "blind" does this come from? None of them make sense in the etymology Denazz (talk) 09:03, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
It's a protein involved in the development of muscles and eyes. Flies without the muscleblind gene have defects in muscle development and photoreceptors. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3315501/ Smurrayinchester (talk) 14:04, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
Does anyone know the etymology of Amtsleiter? I couldn't find anything online. Seraphinanewt (talk) 12:47, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
Aside from the obvious Amts + Leiter (Etymology 2)? Chuck Entz (talk) 13:06, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
Or more specifically Amt + -s- + Leiter. --Lambiam 09:07, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
Origin? 90.241.192.210 20:39, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
What do you mean? All four Dutch entries already have etymologies. —Caoimhin ceallach (talk) 00:01, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
Please create a article on the Latin word fotrum. I already have made a request. 90.241.192.210 17:37, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
??? Caoimhin ceallach (talk) 17:42, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
Read the Latin requested entries the term evolved to become German Futtaral . 90.241.192.210 17:54, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
Since this has nothing to do with Dutch haar you should start a new topic for that. You might also consider using a less demanding tone when interacting with other users. —Caoimhin ceallach (talk) 21:12, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
For what it's worth, "fotrum", also "fodrum", is from Proto-West Germanic *fōdr. Compare Old French fuerre (modern French fourreau). 84.63.31.91 18:56, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
pound § Etymology 1 states that it's derived from *spend- (“to pull, stretch”), but it's *(s)pend- that means pulling or stretching. *spend- means libating or pouring. I think that *(s)pend- may have been the intended link, but I'm not sure. Jlwoodwa (talk) 19:47, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
Fixed. Безименен (talk) 21:20, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
Does anyone know or have a theory regarding the etymology of this word? It looks like a native word formed from repetition of the word gara. But when I searched for that word (gara) on the KBBI website, it had a quite different meaning to it (gara-gara). Berbuah salak (talk) 12:39, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
Does anyone here know about the etymology for the word duka in Sundanese? It basically means 'in ignorance' or most notably the phrase 'I don't know'. Based on many words that I've come across in languages, it might come from the Sanskrit word duhkha (sorrow). I think since 'not knowing or being ignorant=not enlightened=sorrowful' (I don't know where that saying comes from, I think it goes on like that or something), it makes sense for the meaning to change. What do you think? Udaradingin (talk) 16:23, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
@Udaradingin: You're right about this. The connection is even more apparent in Javanese where you have the same two seemingly remotely related meaning: Javanese duka is the krama andhap word corresponding to ngoko embuh ('I don't know'), and is actually a clipped form of duka dalem '[lit.] my sorrow'. So saying duka originally expressed an apology for not being able to provide the requested information. I assume that this practice and the term originated in Javanese and later spread to Sundanese, as with many words and expressions belonging to the krama = lemes speech level.
Btw, you would have seen the connection on the page for duka itself weren't it for the utterly weird practice of some editors to reduce Javanese (and also Sundanese and Balinese) entries in Latin script to become mere "Romanizations" (NB without even a gloss) of Carakan main entries. All regional languages are written in Latin script in daily practice, and only few speakers of those languages are fully competent in their respecitive heritage scripts. This is as absurd as reducing all Vietnamese quoc ngu entries to "Romanizations" and using chu nom forms as main entries instead. I'll have to bring this to the Beer Parlour some time. –Austronesier (talk) 19:47, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Does anyone have an idea about the etymology of തനിച്ച് (taniccŭ, "alone, by oneself")? Seraphinanewt (talk) 15:29, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
According to this source, From Proto-Dravidian *tan + -iccŭ (which I believe is a past tense marker?). PortalandPortal2Rocks (talk) 07:32, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
In Armenian (cf. Old Armenian արև (arew, “sun”)), Indo-Aryan (cf. Sanskrit रवि (ravi, “solar deity”)), perhaps Anatolian (cf. Hittite 𒄩𒊒𒉿𒈾𒀀𒄑𒍣 (ha-ru-wa-na-a-iz-zi, “[it] gets bright”)), there is evidence for pIE root *h₂rew- (“to radiate”). Does this data suffice to reconstruct the IE root? In particular, is the Hittite verb secure enough? It resembles the Luwian word for 'road', which Kloekhorst derives from *h₃er- (“to rise”) instead. Безименен (talk) 21:13, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
Kümmel, Martin Joachim (2011–2023) Addenda und Corrigenda zu LIV²[3], page 38 has added the root. —Caoimhin ceallach (talk) 22:40, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
Not gonna lie, I'm thinking another copyright trap again. Looking up מאָרקען (morken) on the CYED just links me back to אָפּמאָרקען (opmorken). The closest word I could find that has a reliable etymology is סמאַרקען (smarken) or סמאָרקען (smorken, “to blow one's nose”), but that has a drastically different meaning to opmorken. It's currently the daily word on the CYED if you're interested, but here's a screenshot of the section for future reference. Insaneguy1083 (talk) 11:28, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
Update: can't find it on the CEYD or JNW either. Insaneguy1083 (talk) 11:30, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
Google gives a few hits for unmarked מארקען (marken), but they are either in Hebrew or generally appear to be impromptu neologisms based on English mark. Insaneguy1083 (talk) 11:36, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
Does Spanish word hay somehow related to the Tagalog word "may"? Klama Di Kaoa (talk) 08:01, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
No, and neither does Welsh mae. —Mahāgaja · talk 15:00, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
On the KBBI website, this word is said to be a loan from Old Javanese ḍayuṅ, but I kinda doubt it because this word could be a native word, because it has a final syllable that rhymes with the words payung, gayung, and duyung. Do you agree that this word is a loan from Old Javanese? Or do you have another theory regarding the etymology of this word? Berbuah salak (talk) 12:13, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
@Berbuah salak: Next to Old Javanese ḍayuṅ there is also rayuṅ in Zoetmulder's dictionary. The regular correspondence between OJv r- and Malay d- suggests that this was inherited from a mid-level proto-language (replacing the Proto-Malayo-Polynesian forms *bəʀsay and *aluja). Alternatively, Malay could have borrowed the word from the OJv variant form ḍayuṅ. To stay on the safe side (as with so many Malay-Sundanese-Javanese (near-)identity correspondences), we should just say "Compare with..." with a mention-template; a cognate-template would be wrong if we can't exclude borrowing in either direction. –Austronesier (talk) 19:08, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
From what I was able to find, it either comes from the Russian word for a kind of bird, the French "caboche", meaning head, or from the uniform of Aleksey Arakcheyev. Which is it? 165.225.210.221 17:11, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
I had never heard of Skobeloff, before, but apparently it's mostly used to refer to a variant of a teal- / turquoise- / cyan-like color. The name itself is a rare name found at least in USA. It's also very similar to Russian Skobelev, which apparently would be derived from a Russian word for 'dog'. Wakuran (talk) 10:18, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
The current etymology opens
From Proto-Semitic *ʿakbar- (“mouse”) mingled with عُرْقُوب (ʕurqūb, “hamstring, Achilles tendon”) from *ʿarqūb- (“hamstring, Achilles tendon”) […]
This "mingling" is unbelievable. Contamination between two quadriliterals with initial /ʕ/ is supposed to have produced a word with final /ʕ/? Where is the /j/ supposed to have come from, given neither parent has one?
If this isn't just nonsense, can we add e.g. some posited intermediate forms to show what's supposed to be going on? 4pq1injbok (talk) 17:16, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
@4pq1injbok: It’s called a “blend” in more frequent linguistic language.
The ya- is a residual suffix in zoology and botany, as in يَنْبُوع (yanbūʕ) and يَحْبُور (yaḥbūr), which wasn’t productive in Classical Arabic any more, or at least no regular part of the grammar, hence it estranges you. There can be no reasonable doubt this is the same prefix. So it can be made more explicit in the etymology.
Both Proto-Semitic reconstructions boast general acceptance,
Militarev, Alexander, Kogan, Leonid (2005) “ˁakbar-”, in Semitic Etymological Dictionary, volume II: Animal Names, Münster: Ugarit-Verlag, →ISBN, page 47 No. 30 for the mouse word (found sparsely as عَكْبَر (ʕakbar) and synonymous to يَرْبُوع (yarbūʕ) acc. to Hommel, Fritz (1879) Die Namen der Säugethiere bei den südsemitischen Völkern als Beiträge zur arabischen und äthiopischen Lexicographie, zur semitischen Kulturforschung und Sprachvergleichung und zur Geschichte der Mittelmeerfauna. Mit steter Berücksichtigung auch der assyrischen und hebräischen Thiernamen und geographischen und literaturgeschichtlichen Excursen[4] (in German), Leipzig: J. C. Hinrichs’sche Buchhandlung, page 338, I find use in a magazine 1995 for voles, beside personal names)
and you know عَرْقُوب (ʕarqūb, “Achilles tendon”), another such mingling, Militarev, Alexander, Kogan, Leonid (2000) “ˁarḳūb-”, in Semitic Etymological Dictionary, volumes I: Anatomy of Man and Animals, Münster: Ugarit-Verlag, →ISBN, pages 22–23 No. 21 etymologized as said in the Wiktionary mainspace.
Militarev, Alexander, Kogan, Leonid (2005) Semitic Etymological Dictionary, volume II: Animal Names, Münster: Ugarit-Verlag, →ISBN, page 320 No. 251 they have a separate reconstruction *yarbVˁ- for يَرْبُوع (yarbūʕ) ‘kind of rodent’ by comparison to Eblaite 𒀀𒊏𒅤𒌝 (a-ra-bù-um /ʔarrabuʕum/) and Akkadian arrabum (“dormouse? jerboa?”) , which is quite at loss, not generally entertained in Assyriologist literature (could they be ع ر ب (ʕ-r-b) from the animal passing through fields etc.?), and yet they “cf.” to it on the mouse entry (in the book only, not SED online) and hence twine يَرْبُوع (yarbūʕ) and *ʕakbar-.
So what is reasoned on Wiktionary is the best you get. The etymology was discovered by looking at the animal jerboa, a mouse with jumping tendons; quite fast so, while filling the Arabic fauna coverage of Wiktionary. If you overthink the complications of steps it does not become true, yet note that the designations of such fleeting small animals are often disfigurations. {{unknown}} is also justified. Fay Freak (talk) 18:33, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
Does anyone know the etymology of Galician baduar ("to babble, speak nonsense")? It may be a stretch, but could it be related to Frence badouillard ("reveller, partygoer")? Seraphinanewt (talk) 15:20, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
Projecting it back into ‘Vulgar Latin’ gives us *batulāre, which looks like a verb based on the (rare) Late Latin batulus, from the Greek βάταλος. Nicodene (talk) 00:33, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
According to most theories, this word is related to Meluḫḫa, however I feel it might have some connection with the Sanskrit root mlai- (म्लै), which has been linked on Wiktionary to मलीयस् and कु-मार, where it is said to mean, "to fade, whither, decay" or "dirty, filthy", etc.
So, is it possible that म्लेच्छ (mleccha) "barbarian" comes from म्लै- (mlai-) "filthy; decaying"? Or is it merely a borrowing of Meluḫḫa?
Or does mlai- come from some Harappan word like *m(i)yal- or something, which gave rise to both mleccha and Meluḫḫa?
Please clarify.
122.172.86.85 16:47, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
I think this should count as unknown. Mayrhofer (Vol. 2, p. 389) suggests Latin blaesus (“lisping, stammering”). The root म्लै (mlai) seems to be a Middle Indic variant of म्ला (mlā) (p. 388), so it can hardly account for the much older म्लेच्छ (mleccha). —Caoimhin ceallach (talk) 21:01, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
I'm at my wit's end here. I've written all I've got in the Etymology section. Insaneguy1083 (talk) 04:42, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
@Insaneguy1083: The etymology dictionary https://verbum.by/esbm/sutnasc suggests that сутнасць is a deformed Russian word, which displaced the native word існасць (https://verbum.by/esbm/isnasc https://verbum.by/hsbm/isnost) in the beginning of the 20th century. But I'm very incompetent in anything related to etymology and have no information to share other than the links to these dictionary entries. --Ssvb (talk) 01:56, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
In Yiddish, nouns ending in the Germanic diminutive -el typically take a plural inflection -ach: פֿערדל > פֿערדלעך etc. I've found two explanations for this, but both of them only on very unreliable-looking forums. One says it is a German dialect plural inflection, but I doubt that, since I am fairly well travelled in German and have never heard it. None of the German plurals are even similar enough that a plausible soundshift could get you there. The other explanation says it is a Russian plural inflection, but I can only find this as the instrumental case, which sounds unlikely. Doric Loon (talk) 10:16, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
Our entry ־לעך#Etymology 2 says it's from Middle High German -lech, which is both singular and plural, but has apparently become just plural not only in Yiddish but also in some varieties of East Franconian. See the dialect map at the Sprechender Sprachatlas von Bayern: open "Sonstiges" above the map toward the bottom and click on "Diminutivendung in 'Hündchen!/-lein'". In Lower Franconia you see some instances of -lich written in red; the note says that text written in red denotes plural forms that deviate from the singular. This explanation is way more likely than the suggestion that it comes from the Russian prepositional (not instrumental) plural ending -ах (-ax) —Mahāgaja · talk 17:02, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
Yes, it's definitely a Germanic ending found in German dialects. I would guess that the ch-part is the same as that in -chen (Proto-Germanic *-ik-). Slavic influence could maximally have influenced the restriction to the plural (in adjectives this -ch appears also in the genitive and accusative plural). I think it's possible, but not necessary. It's just as plausible that there were two competing forms and ultimately the "longer" one became the plural of the "shorter" one. 84.63.31.91 18:49, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
It would be worthwhile for someone who knows more about Yiddish than me to look into whether ־לעך (-lekh) is present in the earliest stages of Yiddish, before speakers moved to Eastern Europe and came into contact with Slavic. —Mahāgaja · talk 18:58, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
Thanks everyone. The entries at ־לעך amd -lech are very clear and have the answers I was looking for. And unexpected, because I have read Dürer, but didn't twig to this. Also, the information is well sourced, so that is great. Mahagaja is right that it would be useful to have a note on when this first appeared in Yiddish, but at least we have a date for the German precursor.
So the info I was looking for was there all the time, but since you would expect ־עך (if you use the singular as a starting-point), finding ־לעך is not exactly intuitive. Can I suggest that we need a link to ־לעך from either פֿערדל or פֿערדלעך, and other similar words? Is there an approved way to do this? (Better to put an etymology section in the entry on the plural, or since it's almost just a redirect, put the etymology of the plural together with that of the singular in a single discussion?) I'll be glad to do this. Doric Loon (talk) 07:51, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
Of course we can add an etymology section to all plurals saying "From {{af|yi|פֿערד|־לעך}}" etc., even though we normally don't do that for nonlemma forms using productive inflectional endings. We can also create an entry for ־עך (-ekh) explaining that although it can be interpreted as a plural ending that gets added to ־ל (-l), etymologically it's actually ־לעך (-lekh) and to see that entry for more. —Mahāgaja · talk 08:57, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
Super, thanks. I'll add that. Doric Loon (talk) 09:35, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
What is the origin of this word (maṭar)?
According to translations of pea, the Bengali and Marathi words for this are মটর (moṭor) and मटार (maṭār) respectively, which are clearly cognates.
What could be the possible origin of these reflexes?
122.172.83.252 15:30, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
It would seem that these are one and the same word, yet we derive the English from the plural of "may" and the Scots from Old Norse "munu". Maybe both could be from a confluence of these two influences? 84.63.31.91 18:51, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
Perhaps so. The etymology given for the Scots entry looks better as things are though, as it's consistent with the clearly related Northern English dialect word mun. --Overlordnat1 (talk) 06:42, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
As Scandinavian languages usually have a greater overlap for words meaning may and must, I'd argue Scandinavian influence sounds likely. In many varieties, the cognate for "may" might mean both "may" and "must", depending on context. Now, "munu" is from another root, but it still follows the semantic pattern. Wakuran (talk) 14:27, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
Surely this is a diminutive of chop rather than from chew+gobble? In support of this hypothesis I can not only draw your attention to the etymologies of dribble and nibble and perhaps kibble but I also know someone originally from Leicester who says chop to refer to barbers cutting hair and chobble to refer to them finely cutting the hair after ‘chopping’ off the large strands to begin with. It only refers to noisily chewing things like boiled sweets in the West Mids though. The admittedly unreliable Urban Dictionary claims the word is used in Southern England to mean ‘to chatter’, which also ties in with the ‘chop’ meaning (though this is less clear, as it could be that the chatterers are metaphorically ‘chewing’ or ‘gobbling’ the air, rather than ‘chopping’ it with their teeth. Overlordnat1 (talk) 19:36, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
Etymology needs better format.Denazz (talk) 10:56, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
As seen in Category:Belarusian terms suffixed with -ці. In fact, if it always comes after -сь (-sʹ), could we not consider -сьці (-sʹci) as a separate particle? Insaneguy1083 (talk) 19:32, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
@Insaneguy1083: There are also words like паўзці. --Ssvb (talk) 01:43, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
That's...a verb infinitive ending though. With clear cognates in Russian -ти́ (-tí) and Ukrainian -ти́ (-tý). -ці (-ci) is absolutely not a suffix in the case of паўзці (paŭzci), or other verbs ending in -ці (-ci) like падысці (padysci). We're discussing -ці (-ci) in its capacity of forming adverbs with the sense of "some", and how AFAICT it seems to always follow -сь (-sʹ). Insaneguy1083 (talk) 02:00, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
The protist Cyclidium is the type genus of the family Cyclidiidae. A priori it comes from the latin cyclus (circle), but I don't see anything circular in that protist. Have you another idea ? Gerardgiraud (talk) 15:30, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
Cyclidium looks like the straightforward Latinization of an Ancient Greek word *κυκλίδιον (kuklídion), which could be a learned neologism formed from κύκλος (kúklos) + -ίδιον (-ídion), which speakers of Ancient Greek would have understood to mean “little circle”, or, more generally, “little round thing”. I don't know what Müller saw, but in some preparations the appearance is rather round.[5] --Lambiam 19:26, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
@Gerardgiraud: Ancient Greek κύκλος (kúklos) can also refer to a wheel. Does it have anything like spokes or revolve like a wheel would? Chuck Entz (talk) 20:16, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
Müller's original description here, says "Vermis inconspicuus simplicissimus pellucidus, complanatus orbicularis, vel ovatus (i.e. flattened circular, or ovate)." Gerardgiraud (talk) 13:33, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
The use of vel suggests that Müller considered complanatus orbicularis and ovatus to be synonymous. He adds Danish names, for Cyclidium bulla BOBLE-RUNDEREN, which may mean something like “the bubble rounder” (Latin bulla means “bubble”). All other Cyclidia he describes are assigned a Danish name of the form XXX-RUNDEREN. I don’t find a singular noun Runder in any Danish dictionary, so I’m not quite sure how to explain these Danish names. --Lambiam 11:03, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
I guess that in Danish, the -er-ending might not necessarily indicate a doer, but can also just be a noun ending, like a "roundie". Then, I'm also a bit baffled by the coinage, anyway. Wakuran (talk) 15:56, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
Why was the term for this concept borrowed from Portuguese rather than, say, Spanish (auto de fe, which the TLFi actually says is the etymon of French autodafé) or Italian (atto di fede)? PUC – 15:38, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
Port wine became very popular in England in the 18th century, when, due to the Anglo-French wars, French wine could not be imported. England had much stronger ties with Portugal then than with Spain, even though Spain too sided with Great-Britain.
The Online Etymology Dictionary forwards the theory that the Portuguese form took hold in English through popular accounts of the executions following the 1755 Lisbon earthquake. Our article does not mention executions, but that on the Portuguese Wikipedia relates that the Inquisition burned an effigy of Francisco Xavier de Oliveira in an auto-da-fé. The Inquisition had condemned Oliveira in absentia (he lived in London) for publishing a pamphlet reportedly ascribing the earthquake to God's wrath for Portugal's Catholicism and its support for the Inquisition. --Lambiam 11:31, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
Anyone fancy cleaning up the etymology that was just added (judging correctness, adding Hebrew script, etc)? - -sche (discuss) 18:46, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
This actually comes from the Hebrew scriptures. Here's an example from 1 Samuel 12 that I think shows what's really going on:
וּבְנֵ֥י עֵלִ֖י בְּנֵ֣י בְלִיָּ֑עַל לֹ֥א יָדְע֖וּ אֶת־יְהוָֽה׃ (Hebrew)
Καὶ οἱ υἱοὶ Ηλι τοῦ ἱερέως υἱοὶ λοιμοὶ οὐκ εἰδότες τὸν κύριον. (Septuagint Ancient Greek)
porro filii Heli filii Belial nescientes Dominum (Latin Vulgate)
Now the sons of Eli were sons of Belial; they knew not the LORD. (King James Version)
Now the sons of Eli were scoundrels; they had no regard for the LORD. (New Revised Standard Version)
The Hebrew בליעל (“b'liya'al”) בני (“b'ney”) seems to be analyzable as "sons(of)" ["without"-"use"]. The Septuagint translates the second word as Ancient Greek λοιμοὶ (loimoì), a word for pestilence or pest. The Vulgate interprets it as a name, and the KJV follows suit. I included the NRSV to show how a modern Protestant translation treats it. Hebrew doesn't have a lot of morphology for adjectives and adjectival nouns, so having a noun phrase followed by a noun in the construct case followed by a compound adjective with nothing in between doesn't surprise me. I would interpret the Hebrew as saying "The sons of Eli were sons of worthlessness [no-good men]".
We thus have a Hebrew figure of speech meaning "no good" (of men) (the female equivalent also occurs) being misinterpreted as "sons of Belial". That would be like interpreting "bitch" in "son of a bitch" as literally meaning "demon". Such is the nature of medieval biblical scholarship...
Anyway, that's my best guess. I'm not sure how to write this up in the entry. Chuck Entz (talk) 21:37, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
What Hebrew noun corresponds to use in this term, by itself, without בְּלִי? The entry mentions “ya-al”, which suggests יָעַל. There is יֹעַל (yo'al, “he is made efficient”), but this is a verb form. --Lambiam 12:37, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
Is the Celtic kaletos ety added here correct? I can't find any works supporting or even mentioning a connection to kaletos, and the cited paper merely argues that derivation from Calidones is "a strong candidate", not that it definitely does come from kaletos. See Wiktionary:Etymology_scriptorium/2024/May#Lisbon for background; many other etys by this user have had to be reverted as incorrect or spurious. - -sche (discuss) 16:20, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
The same author (Andrew Jennings) has also published (according to his homepage) an article called "Hjaltland Revisited: The Place-name Shetland and its Celtic Origin", which implies that he believes the hypothesis (or did back in 2011). If there's no evidence of anyone else believing this, then we shouldn't put too much weight on what appears to be a fringe suggestion. I can't tell if the paper linked at the bottom of the entry has ever been published in a peer-reviewed journal or if it's only been uploaded to academia.edu by the author. It doesn't seem to have any date of publication. —Mahāgaja · talk 20:33, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
Searching for Shetland+Caledones is bringing up as little as searching for Shetland+kaletos did—only Jennings, AFAICT—so I've attributed his view to him; no objection if you or anyone else want(s) to reduce its prominence even further (say, move the whole suggestion to Further reading, or remove it). - -sche (discuss) 20:55, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
I read the article. It is the author's preferred explanation and I find it a sound argument. The article was published in volume 87 of Norna-rapperter, which is peer-reviewed. The volume is titled Etymologiens plass i navneforskningen. Although I can't find it online, not even a table of contents, it must have appeared in it because there is what this review has to say about it:
I had already removed the mention of *kaletos because it is tentative and not important to the line of argument in the article. —Caoimhin ceallach (talk) 21:16, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
Were the original inhabitants of Shetland even Celtic? I don't think Goidelic speakers ever settled there; are there traces of Pictish in the archipelago? —Mahāgaja · talk 15:20, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
Jennings doesn't voice an opinion, but he discusses all the possibilities. He just calls them the pre-Norse inhabitants. That they were Celtic is an inferral of the reviewer. —Caoimhin ceallach (talk) 15:40, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
William Watson thought so in 1926, and he has a lot of academic standing. Watson argued for a *cat- origin rather than a *kalet- origin, but the Celtic origin of Shetland has been the mainstream view there for a century.
Watson, William J.; (1994), The Celtic Place-Names of Scotland, Edinburgh, Birlinn, →ISBN, First published 1926. 24.108.18.81 02:43, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
Just noting I have restricted the IP from editing content pages (they can still edit discussion pages) for reasons explained at Wiktionary:Requests for cleanup#Special:Contributions/24.108.18.81. Other edits need to be checked. - -sche (discuss) 22:37, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
Specifically, where Latin forestis comes from. I'm not all that enamoured with the Latin-internal explanation, as far as the semantics are concerned, but at least it would explain the form forestis. Germanic seems more promising, though I don't understand @Leasnam's deriving the word specifically from Proto-West Germanic *furhiþi when that would not explain the /st/ in both Latin and Germanic forms like Forst. Coromines & Pascual (cited on the Latin entry) describe the origin as ‘perhaps from a Frankish *forhist, a collective of/from *forha "pine"’. I can't seem to find a Germanic collective suffix like -hist, so I don't know what to make of this. Whatever this source has in mind, if it does explain the form *forhist then that would strike me as the best proposed etymology. Also it'd be nice to account for the gender mismatch between Latin~Romance (feminine) and Germanic (masculine) if possible.
Paging @Sokkjo as well. Nicodene (talk) 20:37, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
Old High German has both forst m and forsti f (> Middle High German vorste f, perhaps > German Förste (plural)). The Proto-(West) Germanic *forhist has been around for some time if I'm not mistaken, and yes supposes an ending of -ist (not -hist, the h being part of the stem), but where this -ist comes from is also a mystery. If Latin foresta comes from Proto-West Germanic *forhu, the how is really unknown. The nearest thing is Old English fyrhþ and fyrhþe from Proto-West Germanic *furhiþi. I'm not saying definitively that I stand on this as a theory, but it hypothetically might possibly be arrived at (with lots of luck and magic), IF *furhiþi goes into Latin as *forisi- then back into Old High German where an excrescent -t is added then BACK into Latin...it'd be a mess. But thoughts are welcome Leasnam (talk) 22:22, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
@Nicodene: I think a Germanic etymology is the only reasonable explanation. Germanic does insert *s before *þ/t in some environments, but I think most likely is that WG *furhiþi merged with *hursti to form Continental WG *fur(h)isti. -- Sokkjō 22:06, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
So a sort of blend. Interesting. Perhaps that deserves an entry of its own. What might explain the modern Germanic forms being masculine? Nicodene (talk) 22:19, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
Blended *fur(h)isti is also possible, and may alternatively be a blend of *furhu + *hursti (literally “fir-thicket”). The fact that Old High German forsti is feminine also agrees with *hursti f, and Old High German hurst is both m and f, a-decl and i- Leasnam (talk) 22:26, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
Interesting. I should’ve checked the gender of the descendants of *hursti.
It sounds like we all think *furhisti is the best (or least problematic) proposal? As for the *furhu + *hursti explanation, I don’t see how it is accounting for the first *i of *furhisti. Nicodene (talk) 22:55, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
Good point. *furhiþi makes more sense. Leasnam (talk) 23:13, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
Unless it derives from a consonant-stem Proto-West Germanic *furh (> Old English furh/fyrh), which I see we don't have (yet). Leasnam (talk) 23:31, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
Shall we create an entry *fur(h)isti, then? The descendants seem to justify the form, and different possible explanations can always be mentioned in the etymology. Nicodene (talk) 23:39, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
I have no objection :) Leasnam (talk) 23:50, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
Indeed, a Germanic origin is likely considering it was first used in Francia. Any explanation should also account for the fact that Latin forestis specifically meant “king's forest”. I can't find a reference for this, but I wonder if the Latin is instead based on Proto-Germanic *furistaz (“first, ruler”), perhaps a contamination of an adjective Proto-West Germanic *furistī (“royal, the king's”) and *furhiþi (“forest”).
Also, important for the derivation from *furhiþi + *hursti, I can't find the spelling