Talk:зубчатый

RFV discussion: April 2018
,, , and  are derived from , , , , and  respectively. I don’t see why can’t and  be treated alike. Does somebody know better examples, if this suffix exists, as distinct from ? Guldrelokk (talk) 22:35, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Hello. I've fixed/added the etymologies of the terms you've mentioned here. But if palatalises words like  (→ ), why doesn't it do it to  (→ )?
 * Also, I don't understand your second-to-last sentence: "I don’t see why can’t and  be treated alike". What do you mean by that?
 * --Per utramque cavernam (talk) 09:24, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Sorry, I was trying to say that while is clearly a derivative of  – it doesn’t have anything to do with, nor does  have anything to do with  – it doesn’t matter whether to consider  a derivative of  or , its straightforward diminutive with no peculiar senses.
 * I have found, however, a few words, the most important of which is, that must indeed contain as a suffix, extracted from words like . I’ll add a couple and close RFV.
 * Examples of causing iotation where there can be no other suffix are  →,  → ,  → . A counterexample is  → ; this doesn’t seem predictable. Г, on the other hand, is never affected. Guldrelokk (talk) 10:08, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

RFV passed. Examples are now unambiguous. Guldrelokk (talk) 10:44, 23 April 2018 (UTC)