Talk:lạp

I'd like to add non-Sino-Vietnamese readings of SV words to etymology sections instead of less precise See also links. Please add to the Information desk discussion here
 * hv=n indicates that the word is not Sino-Vietnamese and it is exactly what it is: non-literary loans borrowed through non-literary means, or literary readings that diverted from the mainstream of what was considered "literary". And what're you doing seems like a bad idea, since you obviously have quite a limited acquaintance with etymology and dialectology when it comes to Vietnamese: Chinese characters were very often borrowed to write words that are phonetically similar (enough to make a connection) but without any etymological link or relatedness whatsoever, that does not make them into a non-Sino-Vietnamese reading, but simply phonograms (for example, the phonogram ) was used to write, , , , , , none of these are related etymologically). (the Vietnamese adjective) and  are most likely not etymological related. See also man'yōgana and . I think you should leave it as is. PhanAnh123 (talk) 13:04, 30 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Ok, so am I right in thinking that hv means Hán Việt? Can you explain the use of y/n? I would have assumed yes/no but that does not make sense in these examples:
 * viết
 * Non-Sino-Vietnamese reading of Chinese 筆 (“to write, pen/pencil”, SV: bút).
 * {vi-etym-sino|筆|to write]], pen/pencil|hv=y|bút|}.
 * thêu
 * Non-Sino-Vietnamese reading of Chinese 鍬 (SV: thiêu).
 * {vi-etym-sino|鍬||hv=n|thiêu}. Gavinkwhite (talk) 02:42, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
 * As you surmised, I am not an expert of Vietnamese etymology but I want to learn as much as I can about the language and make connections wherever possible. For lạp, lép I took the information from the Vietnamese subsection of 粒 without checking the actual etymology of lép, which I see now is missing/unknown.
 * From checking the etymology of chạp, chợp, lạp, lép in the Vietnamese subsection of 臘, I can see now too that chạp, lạp are related etymologically whereas chợp, lép are merely phonetically similar. Is Is there any other way (e.g. resource other than Wiktionary) for the non-specialist to know which of the possible readings of a Sino-Vietnamese character are etymologically related which are are merely phonetically similar?
 * Thank you. Gavinkwhite (talk) 02:45, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I think that's just a template error and using hv= seems to just turn up as "non-Sino-Vietnamese reading", feel free to correct them whenever you find one.
 * On the resource, unfortunately, there's very little that is both friendly to those that are not too familiar with Vietnamese etymology and is also fairly unmisleading. I myself mostly started from scratch by piecing together whatever I know from the papers I read on various topics related to Vietnamese. Vietnamese philology and linguistics were extremely Sino-centric up until like 30 years ago (and are still so to some extent today), so books often do not clearly indicate what is Vietnamese and what is Sinitic (Chinese), furthermore the wording can be confusing and, due to the muddy distinction between Vietnamese and Chinese in the mind of compliers, dictionaries are often filled with Sino-Vietnamese readings of Sinitic terms that are rarely or straight-up never used.
 * For dictionaries, Dictionarium Annamiticum Lusitanum et Latinum (a.k.a Từ điển Việt-Bồ-La, 1651) was based chiefly on the dialects of Northern Vietnam, is often referenced and is quite helpful in providing words that had clusters as well as indication for lenition; its orthography can be confusing though. Dictionarium Anamitico-Latinum (a.k.a. Từ điển Taberd, 1838) and Đại Nam Quấc âm tự vị (1895), based chiefly on the South Central and Southern dialects, are useful in recovering regional Sino-Vietnamese readings that have become dated or obsolete (Taberd (1838) has as SV reading of  and not a single result for the Northern ) and are also good sources for vocabulary due to their length, although they are not without faults. Tự Điển Chữ Nôm Dẫn Giải is helpful for providing references and examples of usage of Nôm characters, you can clearly see how Vietnamese writers used phonograms and phonosemantic characters to write native words by looking at the examples here and you can also use it to deduce whether words used to have clusters and if they underwent lenition. The Mon-Khmer Comparative Dictionary is very helpful when it comes to native words, Proto-Vietic reconstructions (as well as of other AA branches) can be extracted here; it is a good place to start if you want to know the development of native Vietnamese words.
 * In some cases, a Muong cognate would be useful in shedding light on a Vietnamese word, in which case, you can see the resources I mention in About Muong.
 * On dialectology, Phonétique annamite (dialecte du Haut-Annam) (1903), Ngữ âm tiếng Lộc Hà - Hà Tĩnh ("The Phonetics of the Lộc Hà dialect of Hà Tĩnh", 2018), Từ điển phương ngữ Huế ("A Dictionary of the Huế dialect", 2017), Tone in the Lam River Speech of North-Central Vietnamese (2008), ベトナム語クアンナム方言の音韻に関する共時的・通時的研究 ("A synchronic-diachronic study on the phonology of the Quảng Nam dialects of Vietnamese", 2018) are all valuable resources, all dealing chiefly with the dialects of Central Vietnam.
 * This collection has many Nôm texts transcribed. I have not searched throughout, but many texts are annotated in Northern Vietnamese, with, and such. PhanAnh123 (talk) 04:15, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
 * This is great. Thank you!
 * I've tried amending the hv= code for viết and this is what happens.
 * with just hv= the resulting text is incorrect:
 * Sino-Vietnamese word from 筆 (“to write, pen/pencil”) and bút.
 * with hv= followed by any string of text (e.g. hv=n, hv=y or hv=a1B2C$) the resulting text is correct:
 * Non-Sino-Vietnamese reading of Chinese 筆 (“to write, pen/pencil”, SV: bút).
 * Is this a bug do you think? Gavinkwhite (talk) 04:49, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
 * with hv= followed by any string of text (e.g. hv=n, hv=y or hv=a1B2C$) the resulting text is correct:
 * Non-Sino-Vietnamese reading of Chinese 筆 (“to write, pen/pencil”, SV: bút).
 * Is this a bug do you think? Gavinkwhite (talk) 04:49, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Is this a bug do you think? Gavinkwhite (talk) 04:49, 2 June 2022 (UTC)