Talk:𐌼𐌹𐌳𐌿𐌼𐍉𐌽

RFV discussion: February–March 2020
Is this term actually attested being used as a verb/participle ? I can only find the substantive 🇨🇬. If not attested, is this a reconstruction ? Leasnam (talk) 17:00, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
 * AFAIK, Only attested as a substantive. 𐌷𐌻𐌿𐌳𐌰𐍅𐌹𐌲𐍃 𐌰𐌻𐌰𐍂𐌴𐌹𐌺𐌹𐌲𐌲𐍃 (talk) 17:53, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
 * So a move to reconstruction is needed ? Leasnam (talk) 06:04, 15 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Well, the word is a participle but it is used substantively. Does that make it separate enough from the verb to which the participle belongs to not justify a verb lemma entry? Usually a lemma entry is created for any attested verb, even if only attested as a participle. The fact that this participle is here used substantively does not mean it isn't a participle. Compare also, from which has been assumed as a given (not just by me, also elsewhere).


 * Lacking telltale inflected forms which can only belong to an nd-stem noun (acc. sg. or gen. sg. for example) we can't be sure if this was viewed as a separate substantive - an nd-stem noun - or simply a regular participle just used substantively this one time. Unless I am much mistaken there is currently no way to tell, so it may just be simplest to keep it in mainspace. — Mnemosientje (t · c) 11:02, 15 February 2020 (UTC)


 * RFV-kept. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 03:51, 28 March 2020 (UTC)