User talk:116.36.134.215

좋다
This is the conventional etymology in Korean sources:
 * 특히 자동사로 쓰인 이 용언의 사동사가 '됴ᄒᆡ오-'로 실현된다는 점은 기원적으로 이 용언의 어간형이 '됴ᄒᆞ-'였다가 중세국어 이전의 어느 단계에선가 '둏-'으로 재구조화되었음을 암시한다. link

Vovin sometimes offer Korean etymologies that violate Occam's razor−it is he himself who notes that the sequence has a "phonologically odd shape" which occurs in "no other native Middle Korean word", yet he goes on to posit a native etymology anyways. I would also add that this strange-sounding word is not part of any apparent lexical group within Korean, and also that the sequence 됴 is not uncommon in Sino-Korean and that the loss of the minimal vowel in ᄒᆞ- is highly common in Middle Korean.--Tibidibi (talk) 07:10, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I am agnostic about whether the tyo- element in 鄒牟 is the same element as 됴 in 됴ᄒᆞ-.
 * I will note that earlier in the article, Vovin connects 謁奢 "older brother" to Middle Korean 녯〯 혀ᇰ, which is obviously a serious error; Middle Korean 녜〯 specifically means "past; old time" and cannot be used to mark seniority in age (same as in modern Korean).
 * Later on, he uses 號所治城曰固麻 to identify the putative Baekje word, but this is also in error. As all Korean historians have agreed, the reference is obviously to the first element of the name for the capital of Baekje, 고마ᄂᆞᄅᆞ, since the source text was written during the Ungjin period of Baekje history.
 * So while I generally agree with the etymologies proposed by Vovin, that specific article has issues that suggest it should be taken with a grain of salt.--Tibidibi (talk) 08:31, 9 March 2021 (UTC)