Talk:ღვინო

lol, now mr. Ačaṙean makes fun of us XD. that, Georgians borrowed this word , is just impossible(wine culture is truly old in Georgia) XD. i think that Ačaṙean shouldnt be primary source XD. lol again. p.s. If you observe word's  international forms you 'll get almost same forms for all languages XD. your sincerely myself.93.186.211.251 17:07, 12 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Acharyan is only one source. There are two others, Starostin and Beekes. PS When Armenians were making wine, Georgians still drank lemonade. --Vahag 17:26, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
 * charyan is only one source. There are two others, Starostin and Beekes. ->i dont understand.
 * When Armenians were making wine, Georgians still drank lemonade
 * I didnt offend Armenians, but you did(by saying that), you as a representative of Armenians:).
 * b.t.w. historically, wine is predecessor of lemonade . :)
 * p.s.93.186.211.251 is mine.Dixtosa 15:32, 14 May 2011 (UTC)


 * I meant that Acharian is not the only source saying the Georgian word is borrowed from Proto-Armenian. Beekes and Starostin say the same. See the links under the References section. Especially note what Starostin says. PS We also make better dolma. --Vahag 16:04, 14 May 2011 (UTC)


 * charyan is only one source & I meant that Acharian is not the only source. No you wanted to mean XD.
 * p.s. Partiality of other authors, that you wrote, is questioned. moreover web sites aren't credible.Dixtosa 16:40, 14 June 2011 (UTC)


 * No, their partiality is not questioned. They are very respected scholars. And those are on-line versions of print dictionaries, not just websites. --Vahag 17:37, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
 * But it is online though. Administrator of the site easily can purposefully make corrections, and No one is able to check. Also, Acharean is Armenian(and we all know how they love appropriation:)) [rustaveli was armenain XD, moreover every Georgian poets were armenians, and whole world was settled by armenians ages before]). acharean also could easily use his respect and make such(maybe false) etymological researchs. p.s. if matter was smth. like that: explanatory dictionary of georgian language(by arnold chikobava) or Грузинско-русско-французский словарь (by chubinishvili). never prefer the latter, he was alone, but arnold had tens of people together. Also, never prefer russian pseudo-scientists (russians hate us too XD). ;). with love your co-wikiholic.:).Dixtosa 16:48, 18 June 2011 (UTC)


 * So we have discussed those who think it is a loan from IE, but Fortson 2010: 42 says that most researchers think it is a Wanderwort. I have had trouble finding citaitons though, anyone know of some? Tibetologist (talk) 09:29, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
 * See the discussion at Etymology scriptorium. --Vahag (talk) 10:45, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Categorization :facepalm:
"Categorization should be used even if there is doubt".

Really? Could you please refer me to the rule, which says that we should use categorization even if there are two possible but totally inconsistent etymologies, one (that is categorized now) being less approved?--Dixtosa 16:03, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Eh, categorise both or neither. Or just make Armenian jokes with Vahag. --Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 16:05, 5 August 2012 (UTC)


 * No. Nor is there a rule saying categorization should not be used if there is doubt. We do many things in Wiktionary based not on rules but on common sense. PS Proto-Armenian derivation is not "less approved" and it is not inconsistent with Proto-Kartvelian derivation. The word was inherited into Georgian from Proto-Kartvelian which probably borrowed it from Indo-European languages, namely Proto-Armenian. --Vahag (talk) 16:13, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
 * OK, while appreciating your common-sense perception, imagine a user seeing Category:Georgian terms derived from Proto-Armenian, it says
 * "This category contains Georgian terms derived from Proto-Armenian: Terms in Georgian that originate from the Proto-Armenian language". but wait, someone was talking about a possible derivation, but the category's name and its description do not even mention possibility, so at first glance what would a user think of these word located in that category?
 * what does your common-sense say abut that?
 * BTW, surprisingly, I ve just noticed that derivation from ProtoArmenian is not substantiated at all. How ɣ appeared in ProtoArmenian is also unexplained, whilst the supposition by Klimov and others is based on the common-sense.
 * I got it, yes, i got it, that is "attack in order to defend well" strategy. oh yeah xD--Dixtosa. 16:33, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Look, you're a useful contributor but you understand very little in etymologies. I am tired of debating ღვინო derivation. You borrowed it from Armenian. MOVE ON. --Vahag (talk) 19:55, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Haha, why so confident?:D, maybe because Georgians were the first wine-makers yea?:D
 * Nope, although i understand little, I need the third-party involved and the explanation for your theory--Dixtosa. 20:27, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
 * So, no explanations, no "common-senses" in the theory, so I'm removing the cat.--Dixtosa_HERE IT IS xD_ 20:27, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
 * You are not removing the cat. Until we have separate categories for "terms probably derived from X language" and "terms definitely derived from X language", both should be categorized in the same category. That has the been the unwritten Wiktionary policy so far; see for example parry:, struggle:. --Vahag (talk) 12:39, 22 September 2012 (UTC)