Talk:āda

RFV discussion: June 2019–April 2020
This etymology is complete nonsense and should be deleted. It also makes me wonder how many R:lv:LEV sourced etymologies should be deleted as well. -- 20:06, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
 * You meant to use and post this under WT:ES. This template and this page are for doubts about the existence of the term itself.
 * Can you elaborate how the etymology is nonsense? It makes sense to me, although the likelihood is diminished by the claim of a byform for the term for a goat – it doesn’t go against something we know but rather too much into things we don’t know? And the part about “In Latvian, the term expanded” is irrelevant since meaning shifts from leather and animal hide and human hide are not surprising, so I would delete it anyway. Fay Freak (talk) 00:22, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Closed; not an actual RFV (for the term, anyway). &mdash; surjection &lang;??&rang; 16:09, 19 April 2020 (UTC)