Talk:𐌳𐍂𐌰𐌿𐌷𐍃𐌽𐌰


 * I think -snō is only suffixed to nouns. A noun related to with the meaning ("remnant, leftover"), like  or  seem most probable to me. --Victar (talk) 01:31, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

Koebler lists the verb, where we could get a noun meaning ("something sieved, sieved particles"). I can't find much evidence though. --Victar (talk) 02:01, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't think it's only suffixed to nouns: consider . That said, the current etymology I entered is a bit overconfident, I've edited it to be more cautious. Truth is, I'm not sure of the first element. If it were from an a-stem like I'd expect something like *driugasna in Gothic, though? The -sna suffix seems to always have the -a- when appended to an a-stem noun. The absence of any interfixed vowel (between the base and the suffix) in this word suggests it's derived from something else, perhaps a consonant stem? Honestly, I'm not sure. — Kleio (t · c) 16:48, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
 * That's true, it lacks the thematic vowel, so yep, perhaps a consonant stem like, from 🇨🇬. Either way, doesn't make much sense. --Victar (talk) 18:38, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
 * : I found cognates and created the PGmc entry . --Victar (talk) 00:28, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I am not sure where I initially got the driusan connection at all, I've removed it entirely now and added the pgmc. reconstruction for now. Anyhow, it's interesting that there seem to be Germanic cognates, but I'm a bit surprised still by the au in the Gothic word if *drōhsnō were the pgmc. form. I think the pgmc. *ō in the base word here should yield a Gothic ō as well, not au: see for example, which yields  (not ). Idem . In fact Gothic au only derives from pgmc. *ō in rare cases (before vowels for example) like, but not before a consonant as is the case here. So based on the pgmc. I'd expect the Gothic term to look like  instead. Should possibly note that Lehmann (1986) doesn't seem to find any clear cognates either, not even in Germanic. So the connection of the Gothic term to the pgmc. reconstruction may not be certain. (I'm kind of hampered here by the fact that I only sorta know how pgmc -> gothic works, and don't really know enough about the other Germanic languages to say much about the apparent cognates.) — Kleio (t · c) 04:01, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for updating it. I think the simplest explanation is that the Gothic form is from a zero-grade variant, making >  predicable. --Victar (talk) 04:33, 28 July 2017 (UTC)