Talk:ክታብ

Original West-Semitic clothing term
So  from. Consequentially you think it is all borrowed from Arabic, kind of fetishizing written instruments only come to knowledge from muslim scholars? I thought would retain a most primitive meaning – Təgre has fascinated Nöldeke because they were closest to that state even archaic for the Biblical patriarchs — and as the verb meant (as I put it) “to put in a row or order” that is what they did with an amulet or something around their heads. Don’t forget about —is this just from a verbal meaning “to enlist, to draft” derived from writing? In Kane’s Amharic dictionary the “drafting, enlisting” meanings were deemed Arabisms but I didn’t come to understand how that would have worked in detail. In Fraenkel the meaning of the root is even “, ”, whence he derives  (I admit one would have to ascertain what  technically meant in his time), also makes very much sense for these Ethiopian talisman strips. For Fraenkel the book words seem even more radically from the idea of some parchment etc. being bound together, then perhaps “to scratch” from the idea of needlework. See also the parallel of. Fay Freak (talk) 21:51, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
 * I see no reason to believe that claptrap that Tigre will necessarily be more primitive. What does Leslau say? I can't access the CDG at the moment, but you are right that I assumed this to be the fetishisation of the written word seen across Muslim Africa. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 03:37, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
 * He doesn’t say anything at all about it, doesn’t mention any references and doesn’t even mention the Təgre nouns. Now it is extremely uncharitable to speak of claptrap; first since like the recent linked book tells there wasn’t even discourse about the Littmann’s Təgre publications, nor has anyone assumed it is necessarily more primitive, now you descended into strawmanning. Looking at the Təgre meanings was often helpful, inspiring in telling the stories needed to assay the semantic evolution which we don’t see but its static benchmarks, and telling stories should not be pejorative. It is a bit like some can model a whole dinosaur head from only a skull. It was never claimed that every detail was understood but the rough picture must be inferred since the attestations are ultimately unlikely. Fay Freak (talk) 14:53, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
 * : I'm glad I checked, rather than believing you! Leslau explicitly states the Ge'ez is from Arabic, and I see he also includes the word in his list of Amharic words borrowed from Arabic. You may disagree, but you ought not to misrepresent his claims. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 17:12, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
 * He only says that for Gəʿəz, which is not even mutually exclusive with inheritance. The same word can be borrowed and inherited simultaneously. In contrast he does not seem to assume that for the “Tna.Amh.Gur.”, and especially the Təgre which you asked about and is not mentioned there, so you ought not to misrepresent what I answered to.
 * And even if he said this or that, how does he know? Like those who create an entry for a far-away reconstruction when they see a star, you are far too credulous about published “research”. The research is that they do exactly they same thing I do here, with even less reasoning, and problematic motivation because when one publishes a lexicon of a whole language then one talks of the etymologies of all items even if one should have remained silent (great advantage of this website format, man only talks when one feels ready and not because one needs to meet completion and all expect one to know it because one is that one expert). Fay Freak (talk) 20:10, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
 * This is absurd. You said that "[h]e doesn't say anything at all about it"; this was demonstrably false. Leslau is not always right, but he knows a lot more than I do — what you call credulity, I call humility. If you can't even discuss the facts in an honest way, I have no interest in this conversation. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 21:21, 20 September 2021 (UTC)