Talk:džukela

džukela
Can the Gypsy word be cognate with Sanskrit kukkura, dog? Sounds similar. Bogorm 14:43, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
 * They could be very easily (changes of k > č/dž and r>l or l>r are phonetically quite trivial). Interestingly, Skok does not discuss Turkish and Arabic origin at all, but Arj. 3:540 that he references doesn't mention Gypsy etymology at all. My other source claims the borrowing line as Dijan original put it. However, the Gypsy etymology is plainly superior if the meaning of the Gypsy is indeed "dog" (as opposed to Turkish/Arabic "ignorant"). I'd still like to see some additional verification though. --Ivan Štambuk 14:54, 16 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, it is, according to the quote, if one does not intend to quæstion Skok's knowledge. I do not, thence I replaced the etymology with the more straightforward and sourced one. Bogorm 16:43, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Also note that the Skok is not a "holy cow" and is quite obsolete in some respects, and the new edition of Skok is being written (simply retaining the brand "Skok", like German "Kluge" series) by the bestest Croatian etymologists and and will be published in about 5 years. But until then, this old edition is the best one can find. Also, there are specialised dictionaries for these Turkish LW in Slavic so if someone has access to those and they argument a particular scenario much stronger then Skok, we'd have to take it into account too (esp. if they're published more recently). --Ivan Štambuk 20:49, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I found the Devanagari spelling of the Sanskrit word. It is . kukkura is Pāḷi. The uſer hight Bogorm converſation 20:13, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Gypsy
I cannot conceal my profound diſappointment from this edit. I ſtill cannot fathom how on Earth one can quietly uſe Greek language and not Hellenic language, Albanian and not Shiptar language, Oſſetian and not Iron language, Burmeſe and not Myanmar language, but when it comes to this particular people, one tries to extirpate the habitual Engliſh word in favour of the word wherewith they deſignate themſelves. Wherefore this ſpecial attitude, wherefore...? (See WT:RfV for further details) The uſer hight Bogorm converſation 15:33, 27 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I've yet to see you give any evidence for your claim that Gypsy: is "the habitual English word" for the language. gets many, many more hits than . —Ruakh TALK 00:08, 28 February 2009 (UTC)


 * It's exactly analogous to "Dutch language" and "Holland"/"Netherlands". The reasons are historical usage and the vagaries of how new words begin in the English language.  As Wiktionary editors, we reopt the English language that is actually used, not the language some people think should be used.  I have never, ever seen "Gpsy" used as the name of a language, but have frequently seen ''Romani" used this way...even in authoratative and reputable books about the Gypsies.  In any event, we standardize all out language names in section headers, translation sections, and in etymology templates.  There is not reason to vary the name of a single language among the several places it occurs.  This would only confuse our readers. --EncycloPetey 02:14, 28 February 2009 (UTC)