Talk:képzel

Etymology

 * Here is another approach: : A képez ige gyakorító -l képzős származéka. I didn't see this word in the Új magyar etimológiai szótár. I think we should provide a reference title only if the entry is included in the reference itself. Panda10 (talk) 15:23, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

This document is big and it takes time to find something near the end, but this entry is there, on page 939. It says (with some formatting typos fixed):
 * A végződés: igeképző, amely a mézel, tüzel stb. analógiájára tapad a szóhoz. – Hasonló szemlélethez vö.: ném. sich einbilden ’elképzel valamit’; ném. Bild ’ábrázolás, leírás, ábra, illusztráció stb.’; fr. se figurer ’elképzel’; fr. figure ’kép, alak, forma’; stb.

Thank you for the Tótfalusi link; we should certainly mention that too. Adam78 (talk) 15:31, 23 December 2020 (UTC)


 * OK, I've found it. Basically, it says the same as Zaicz. Panda10 (talk) 15:37, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

Anyway, I think we might normally prefer ÚESz. as a source, even if it's not ready, because it is newer (2016 as opposed to 2006), more comprehensive (as you must have noticed), and perhaps it's more well-grounded as well (compare this review). Adam78 (talk) 15:52, 23 December 2020 (UTC)


 * I was aware of the negative review but this dictionary was all I had at the time, first in printed edition, then I found the online version. The suffixes might be useful, they are missing from other dictionaries that I have. Eőry Vilma's doesn't always contain important details but some words are included that are missing from Zaicz. So it seems that we need to use all of them. Panda10 (talk) 18:29, 23 December 2020 (UTC)