Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2023/April

matamata
I've found a short 1898 study by Émil Goeldi on the etymology of this name. It's in Portuguese, but it says that the name comes from the Arruan matá, meaning "skin", with the repetition (matá matá) giving the idea of "full of skin" or "flabby". This is the only reference I've found on this etymology, with others going back to this one (or saing it's Tupi, with no evidence).

The problem, though, is the name Arruan. Not only it's the sole reference to the etymology, but also to this people and their language. The book Guia histórico Amazônia exótica rewrote it as Aruan and I also tried arruã and aruã, but couldn't find anything, at least on the internet. Perhaps they were refering to the Aruás? Trooper57 (talk) 00:33, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
 * The obvious guess would be one of the, possibly , though one of the such as  would work, too. The  you mention are , by the way. Truth is, there are  for anything better than a guess. Chuck Entz (talk) 04:08, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

Khorramshahr - "green city"?
A friend from Iran told me that "Khorramshahr" means "green city". It would be great to mention this in the article, if it's true. Cheers, --CopperKettle (talk) 04:22, 4 April 2023 (UTC)


 * https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Khorramshahr#Etymology

haste
KLUGE : Etymologisches Wörterbuch der Deutsche Sprache. 24. AUFLAGE. Page 396: "Hast".
 * What's your point? What does Kluge claim? Wakuran (talk) 11:26, 5 April 2023 (UTC)


 * I don't know about the 24th edition, but the 25th edition of Kluge says the same thing about the etymology of as we do. —Mahāgaja · talk 14:33, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

On the "bug" in bugman
The etym. on this page plainly states that this word is a combination of two words, "bug" and "man". The "man" makes sense, but where does the "bug" come from?


 * , I don't know the word or its origin, but two possibilities come to mind. 1) The (possibly archaic?) noun sense "a self-important person", as in big bug, or B), the verb sense "bother, annoy", as in don't bug me. I have no strong argument for either option, though.
 * Cnilep (talk) 02:00, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Cnilep (talk) 02:00, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Cnilep (talk) 02:00, 10 April 2023 (UTC)


 * Another guess is that it could be related to the Reptilian conspiracy theory, that has more-or-less-seriously gained momentum in modern pop culture. Wakuran (talk) 16:02, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Quite possibly. That Wikipedia page mentions the famous theories of David Icke and his 1999 book but not the less famous author Fritz Springmeier whose 1998 book he clearly based a lot of his stuff on (of course it’s all nonsense though). Overlordnat1 (talk) 16:31, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
 * The term is definitely associated with the political right, but Im not sure its a political insult. On a hunch I searched silicon valley bugmen and came up with a few hits, including a picture of an auditorium with hundreds of people sitting in close quarters wearing identical VR headsets and other electronics i couldnt identify. Yes, I narrowed my search on purpose based on a gut instinct, but i think there's something to this ... a bugman is someone so dependent on the artificial and plastic that they've lost their humanness, and even their animalness, to become something barely recognizable as alive, and identical with every other one of its kind.
 * A Vantiy Fair article at this URL includes the sentence People use the derisive term “bugman” to describe liberal men who lack tangible life skills like fixing trucks or growing food—guys who could end up spending their lives behind the bug-eyed screen of a V.R. headset. That reporter may be making the same assumption, but perhaps taking it more literally than i did. — Soap — 16:16, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
 * In my impression, there are more alt-righters than alt-lefties who would take the Reptilian conspiracy theory at face value. The lefties would reference it ironically, but don't accept it as gospel, unlike various fringe conspiracy theory alt-righters. Wakuran (talk) 19:47, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
 * By the way, I managed to found the image you referenced. I don't know if that's a common analysis. Wakuran (talk) 19:53, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I should have linked it in my post. It was right in my face when i searched the phrase silicon valley bugmen so i figured it was unnecessary, but it didnt occur to me at the time that Google loves to filter-bubble us, so what I saw isnt necessarily what others see. Indeed the search has already changed for me just in the last hour, maybe because it wants me to see new content.
 * That said I dont think this has anything to do with the reptilian theory, simply because reptiles arent bugs .... and because the impression I get is that this word really only appeared in the past few years. And I may sound like a stopped clock bringing this up so often, but i wonder if this word has already passed its peak and we are a bit late to the party.    If so there might not be anything we can do to turn up the etymology besides work together to make educated guesses. — Soap — 20:23, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
 * "Bugman" is still in use. CitationsFreak: Accessed 2023/01/01 (talk) 00:05, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Maybe so but why post a link to your to-do list, where the word "bugman" doesn't feature? We should probably get around to adding the senses of entomologist, pest controller and perhaps lepidopterist to the entry too btw. --Overlordnat1 (talk) 08:33, 16 April 2023 (UTC)


 * There's also the "I Will Not Eat the Bugs" meme: unsure whether related or not. Equinox ◑ 21:20, 1 May 2023 (UTC)


 * That looks distinctively plausible. We should probably settle on a vague and heavily qualified etymology containing words like 'possibly' and 'perhaps'. Something like:- "Possibly from the notion that the elite want to force us to eat bugs but perhaps instead from the perceived similarity between bugs, generally regarded as unpleasant and unlikeable, and the elite." As there probably aren't any conspiracists around who believe that humanoid creatures that are literally part-bedbug, or part-insect more generally, secretly control the world then the connection with the reptilian theory can probably be discounted tbh. --Overlordnat1 (talk) 22:31, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
 * As a person who has actually considered eating bugs (I draw my line at seafood, however), I might not be the best person to respond, but my impression was that there were unexpectedly many fringe conspiracists that actually believed in the reptilian conspiracy. Anyway, as the origin seems unknown, I guess there could be three-to-five different etymologies posted, anyway. Seems that most of them would be somehow connected to loosely aligned alt-right movements, anyhow. Wakuran (talk) 11:00, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes but we'd have to show that people actually believe in an 'insectian' conspiracy rather than a reptilian one - I suppose a handful of such lunatics may exist, though I was probably too hasty to assume they did in my earlier comment. The origin is vague though, that's for sure. --Overlordnat1 (talk) 11:19, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
 * There's nothing so far-fetched that some conspiracy theorist somewhere out there won't believe it. —Mahāgaja · talk 11:19, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Or, what I intend to say, is that it seems that in the circles, several of the theories might be less or strongly believed by the involved individuals, but the various notions and semantics still play off of each other. Wakuran (talk) 11:59, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, also there does seem to be a small number of believers in an 'insectian' conspiracy( and ). --Overlordnat1 (talk) 12:08, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
 * The most important function is of course simply to dehumanize and to evoke disgust. The choice for "bug" is fairly obvious and unsurprising in that regard and does not require much additional explanation. As Equinox mentioned, the "eating the bugs" meme also influenced this choice of words and its memetic success without a shadow of a doubt in my mind (knowing the current far-right internet discourse), and likely so did the hive-like, apparently brainless, "soulless" and collectivist ("NPC-like", to reference another similar meme originating in far-right internet culture) behavior of many bugs in general. — Mnemosientje (t · c) 12:41, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
 * This essay might be worth reading, though it's only one person's opinion. He seems to believe it's mostly about conformity. — Soap — 17:10, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
 * (As someone y'all would probably consider fringe right) I would consider this correct, the term is in reference to conformity of said bugman or bugmen being relatable to a hive of ants or bees or Borg or Formics - compare with the term "hive-mind". It can be used to describe conspicuous consumption, group think, etc. Can also have racial or nationality implications though not always, such as "the Chinese Bugmen"

2600:6C56:6DF0:8230:59C:C279:80F5:9B2E 11:47, 28 May 2023 (UTC)Garymericanohasnowikipediaaccount

super-app
The etymology at super-app says it was coined "by BlackBerry founder Mike Lazaridis, during a speech at Mobile World Congress in 2010." I can find lots of people on the web saying the same thing (in nearly the same words), but can't find the actual speech, nor details about it. I looked at half a dozen articles all published after 2020, and mostly citing one another. None give specific details about the Mobile World Congress address they refer to.

I found one instance of the word in a paper (PDF here) from 2017, written in Italian, but I don't really read Italian.
 * Nel caso della Cina, Internet ha rafforzato il substrato culturale trovando un terreno fecondo nella 关系, assumendo una forma differente e creando le super-app;
 * In the case of China, the Internet has reinforced the cultural substrate, creating a rich terrain for 关系 [connections? interoperability?], assuming a different form and creating the super-app [italics in original]

(The paper also mentions Lazaridis as co-founder of Research in Motion, but doesn't connect the word super-app to him.)

If I understand correctly (and please don't take my translation without a grain of salt!), this is suggesting that the apps developed in China, but that doesn't preclude the notion that Lazardis coined the word. I would just like to be able to point more convincingly to when and where he did so. Cnilep (talk) 05:00, 7 April 2023 (UTC)
 * This speech is up on Youtube, in 2 parts. One and Two. CitationsFreak: Accessed 2023/01/01 (talk) 00:14, 16 April 2023 (UTC)


 * Thanks for that! I also found a (presumably durable?) version at Mobile World Congress's web site. I noticed that Lazardis says "we call them super apps", suggesting that this was already BlackBerry in-house usage, and not necessarily something that Lazardis coined, but I've added a quotation to the entry. Also, Lazardis's super apps don't seem to critically include financial services (for example, he calls viewing Twitter from your BlackBerry in-box "a super-app thanks to the seamless and efficient integration made possible by our platform"). Cnilep (talk) 08:24, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Mustache
In some sources, I've found that the etymon of "mustache" is probably not Doric Greek mustax 'upper lip', but rather Latin mustus 'unfermented wine', via a form like Latin mustaceus, describing a moustache covered in wine. We should probably have the etymology pages, at least, describe that the complete origin is unclear, and it might come from a conflation of mustax with mustaceus.

| Maher 1977 goes into detail about the theory, evidently from a previously published paper, also citing Tovar 1969, which I cannot find anywhere. I also have seen Maher's work on the etymology of "mustache" cited in [|Anttilla 1972]

It seems like, among subject experts, the etymology from mustaceus is well accepted. Qwed117 (talk) 08:08, 7 April 2023 (UTC)


 * Perhaps, but it leaves me wondering .... what was the Latin word for mustache beforehand? Presumably there was a two-word phrase like ....-us mustaceus, originally meaning "wine-soaked mustache" ... this would parallel the word for liver coming from iecur fīcātum.... but what was the missing word for mustache?
 * Secondly, there's also a double semantic leap here, from unfermented to unfermented wine, and then from the wine sense to wine-soaked. Whereas with the liver--->fig development, there is only one semantic leap.  How confident are these scholars that the liver>fig thing happened twice in one word? — Soap — 12:41, 14 April 2023 (UTC)


 * Romans might have thought the barba was more important than the mustache in particular. The only specific classical Latin word for mustache I could find is the hapax legomenon subium. Wakuran (talk) 21:15, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
 * According to an article in The New York Times, Romans thought the very idea of a mustache without a beard was outlandish. You were either clean-shaven or grew a beard. So there may not have been a term for just a mustache. --Lambiam 18:11, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

origin of chess terms
Why is the chess piece that moves diagonally called a in English, a  in French, and an  in Russian and Armenian ? PUC – 17:06, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Note to self: this article could be of use as an introduction to the subject. PUC – 17:11, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
 * From what I read, the German Läufer and its equivalents are derived from Andalusian Arabic fil, "elephant", Spanish . It said nothing more, so I'm sorry to dissapoint. 88.128.92.115 17:17, 10 April 2023 (UTC)


 * Alfil.JPG head of the medieval chess piece depicted here may have represented elephant tusks, later interpreted as a bishop's mitre. --Lambiam 18:24, 1 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Interestingly, this question was also addressed to Irving Finkel, who relates to the chessman's shape but interpreted as the fou's cap, supported by detailed images from the MET's collection. Their catalogue notes, as does the linked-above article, that what they call bishop is older than the name. More important I think is the movement of the figures. So I gather this bishop may as well be a coinage as the rules may be. Albeit, Finkel stresses that, paraphrased, such things don't come from manuals; or 11th century manuscripts as the case may be for regina. That said, it could pass for a learned, as is only appropriate for a game of chess, regardless how it was corrupted, and I would not call fantastic changes such as Läufer from le fou a case of folk etymology in the sense of Förstemann, who termed these termini initially, i.e. "gelehrte Etymologie". A notable unrelated example is (xxi) in place of French  (xxi) rather than  (xvii) in southern German trump cards (Tarock).

болꙗринъ
RFV of the etymology.

The Proto-Slavic part is loosely sourced from etymonline and is incompatible with our analysis in related entries, and the Turkic part is loosely sourced from the American Heritage Dictionary and shows real confusion about Turkic etymology (an Old Turkic stem with a Proto-Turkic suffix as ancestor to an Old Bulgar term? Really?). Chuck Entz (talk) 21:26, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

dao
,, /, : how many of these are related? - -sche (discuss) 10:18, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I'd guess that the Thai word would be unrelated, anyway. Wakuran (talk) 20:09, 9 April 2023 (UTC)


 * Pinging as users who speak one of the languages above and have edited Proto-Sino-Tibetan entries : any idea if the Burmese word is related to the Chinese word and how (borrowing? cognate?), and any idea what the origin of the  word is? - -sche (discuss) 18:36, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, the Burmese word Dah (ဓား) is our own main native word for sword and knife. According to Stephan Baron's proposal, it is cognate with Chinese 刀(dāo). Both are said to be descended from Proto-Sino-Tibetan *s-ta-w, with a sparsely attested suffix *-w retained in Sinitic yet lost in Tibeto-Burman. Cepyita (talk) 19:18, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

Sinhalese වතුර (watura)
Our current etymology sources this from. Over in a Reddit post, a user pointed me to this monograph from 1898, which mentions that the word is citable to a text from 1421, before Dutch contact:


 * https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/2419E2E3923F26BB297331D3FF337A7B/S0035869X00025247a.pdf/div-class-title-1-water-watura-in-sinhalese-div.pdf

I am not able to read Sinhalese, nor do I have any business working on such entries. I bring this up here in the hopes that other editors can follow up. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 22:51, 10 April 2023 (UTC)


 * Our only recently-active Sinhalese-speaking editor seems to be User:Lee. Lee, I don't know whether you have access to any dictionaries that might have information about what the origin of වතුර is, but perhaps you can at least determine whether watura does mean water in the text linked above? (It does seem odd, though not unheard of, that such a basic word would be borrowed.) 18:06, 11 April 2023 (UTC)


 * Another hypothesis is that Dutch influence would have reinforced a native word, causing semantic shift... (I'm just saying it's possible. I'm not speculating whether it's likely.) Wakuran (talk) 19:10, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I have rewritten the etymology based on the standard Indological literature. Vahag (talk) 20:05, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you all! ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 17:45, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

Japanese 外見 (gaiken)
Would Japanese gaiken be a calque of German Aussehen or Dutch uitzicht, or are they unrelated? (The semantics fit, but maybe Germanic borrowings in Japanese are of a comparably late date.) Wakuran (talk) 22:38, 11 April 2023 (UTC)


 * Nihongo Kokugo Daijiten attests 外見 from 1171. By comparison, it suggests that, calque of Dutch , comes from the 蘭学 period (roughly 1720-1868; Wiktionary attests it from 1792), and dates , from , to 1834. I don't know of Germanic influence before the Dutch traders. Cnilep (talk) 00:24, 12 April 2023 (UTC)


 * Alright, just similar ways of thinking, then. Thanks. Wakuran (talk) 08:49, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

Genus name Arisaema
Does anyone have a source on the current Wiktionary etymology (arum+σῆμα)? The Flora of North America, which is a pretty well-researched source on taxonomic etymologies, has it as aris (a name "used by Pliny" for arums) + αἷμα ("blood", referring both to the red-spotted leaves and the blood-red fruits). -- Photosynthetic430 (talk) 17:02, 13 April 2023 (UTC)


 * I defer to FNA, at least with respect to . I don't know what their source for aris is. L&S has aros, aron, and arum for Greek . The Pliny text at Perseus has inflected forms aro and ari (of ''arum) apparently referring to the plant in question or a close relative. DCDuring (talk) 18:19, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
 * A search for aris in Pliny at Perseus generated an error. DCDuring (talk) 18:22, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Latin "ae" usually comes from Ancient Greek "αἱ", not from "η", so our current etymology looks highly unlikely to me. Here is the Lewis & Short entry at Perseus for the plant, and here is the Gaffiot entry.
 * As for the genus itself, here and on the following page is the original description, which I'll quote here:

Der verdienstvolle Erforscher der Flora indica, Wallich, hat in seinem tentamen florae nepalensis drei Arumarten beschrieben und abgebildet (A. nepenthoides, costatum und speciosum). Diese sind durch Mangel der Afterblüthen, durch Stamina columnaria und durch Spadices dioices ausgezeichnet, und verdienen daher ebenfalls als eigene Gattung aufgeführt zu werden. Wir wollen solche einstweilen mit Beziehung auf die Variegation dieser Arten Arisaema nennen, und folgendermaassen definiren.

XI. Arisaema, Fleckenaron, Mart. Spatha basi convoluta Spadix dioicus, apice longe nudus. Staminodia et pistillidia nulla. Antherae verticillatae in filamentis distinctis, transvere bivalves, unilocellares. Ovaria distincta, unilocularia, ovulis paucis basilaribus. Stigma peltatum. Baccae distintae, oligospermae.

Hierher gehört vielleicht auch A. Dracontium, das wenigstens im Bau der Antheren übereinstimmt.
 * It looks like the name was meant to refer to the speckles, which could be interpreted as resembling drops of blood. Chuck Entz (talk) 05:07, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks, all! I'll go ahead and update the page. Photosynthetic430 (talk) 23:25, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
 * : after looking at the illustrations at I see that I was wrong about "speckles", though the markings on the spathe look like blood-colored stripes. So the part about the Ancient Greek and Latin is correct, but the feature on the plant referred to was wrong. Chuck Entz (talk) 23:50, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
 * ...Huh, apparently I was wrong about that, too. I'm more familiar with Arisaema triphyllum, which often has similar dried-blood-colored stripes, but A. triphyllum stripes can fade out lower on the spathe. For some reason, I thought the fade zone was sometimes speckled, but after a quick image search I'm not sure where I got that idea. Whoops. That species'll be blooming around here in a week or two, and you bet I'll be checking it out when it does! Photosynthetic430 (talk) 19:23, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

vilorta
What's the ety? The Diccionario de la lengua española says it's from Latin bis "two" + rotula, but clearly there must've been intermediate steps to get from bis rotula to vilorta. - -sche (discuss) 17:07, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
 * In Spanish, b and v would regularly gets merged to a sound between the two, so orthographically, a v could be chosen for spelling a word just as likely as b. Then, I guess the dropping of a final -s isn't unlikely, whereas rotula -> lorta could be due to metathesis, which has been very common in the history of Spanish. Wakuran (talk) 01:44, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Boyancé
I haven’t been able to find any source for this surname. it’s the origin of the given name Beyoncé, and there’s an odd claim that it means “beyond others”, which I’d think just came fancifully from the musician. I was thinking that it could be related to boire or bouillir, but that was just my first thought. Thanks for any help CanadianRosbif (talk) 22:46, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
 * The origin of the given name Beyoncé is actually her mother's maiden name, which was a typo on her birth certificate. It was supposed to be Beyincé, which seems to be a Louisiana Creole name. At any rate, Beyoncé's grandfather's surname didn't have an o in it, so a connection with or  seems unlikely (though not as unlikely as a connection with, which is ludicrous). —Mahāgaja · talk 08:18, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
 * This suggests that the next stage back in time from it being a Louisiana French/Creole surname was it being a Canadian French surname, but I haven't managed to spot anything else about the origin. (I did come across yet another spelling, Buyince.) - -sche (discuss) 09:58, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I didn't know the term "bama", when I read that article, but apparently bamma is a reclaimed term for a black hick. (Would that be a "blick"?) Wakuran (talk) 11:36, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Petschaft
The request for clean-up is basically a RfE: Which sense of Schaft respectively -schaft is this?

I am leaning towards because it is more abstract and morphologically plausible (except that "pet" would be a cranberry morpheme). On the other hand, as shaft might indicate, any oblong shape is enough to warrant semantic drift.

That said, I wonder if the occurance is too late for any reinforcement by the family of shape as in. Is it reasonable to infer phonologic variation long before it surfaced in writing? 88.128.92.66 07:32, 16 April 2023 (UTC)


 * Apparently, it's a folk etymology to begin with. I guess I'd go with, as well. It's still a living suffix, as far as I know. Wakuran (talk) 11:00, 16 April 2023 (UTC)


 * In hindsight, the abstract femininum is less likely. I had not seen it used in a sentence. The originally Slavic word could be m. and f. Deutsche Wörterbuch attests to m. and n. only.


 * A metaphoric meaning akin to f. is not evident, and I am not sure if the synonymy with  extends to senses that are (see DWB 3, d, also 2, n).
 * Confusingly, Schweizerisches Idiokiton comments to compare to a feminine noun with examples that can be related to bedstead, respectively  and workshop. Hence I am still thinking that a case can be made while the cranberry remains questionable.
 * On the other hand, the masculine as synonym to  is probable. I have initially found  online translating  from a gloss to Middle French, akin to It. graffito, APr. grafi "signature" (cf. Französisches Etymologisches Wörterbuch: ).  is a true homophone, unrelated to .  is clearly figurative, anyway.
 * The oddest part is that is significantly collocated:
 * (DWB, cited as 2 Mose 2, 36, found as 2 Mose 28, 36).
 * That is Exodus 28, where "and engrave" translates . Please, tell me that this is coincidence. 88.128.92.164 09:34, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

bierka
How is from ?

I can barely gather from patyczek do bierek "pick stick" (PWN and machine translation) what the idea is, which says nothing of the other sense, i.e. "chess piece or pawn". Vasmer compares it with, takes on two hypotheses and one internal derivation, indeed from a form of , only to conclude that it is difficult. The wiktionary entry follows suit but omits. Miklosich has it along with Bulgarian and similar forms with different meanings under the same etymon (s. v. ber), which Trubachev hasn't as far as I can tell.

Would it be offensive to consider the Polish words too uncertain? 88.128.92.66 08:10, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
 * No, it wouldn’t be. But as a 2023 philologist, I have found the origin in ten minutes. The cognateship to 🇨🇬 meaning a tally stick and nameplates of sheep is the most certain part here. From here we find, used in  and 🇨🇬 also meaning a race of sheep and being cognate to 🇨🇬. 🇨🇬,  means “young ewe”, 🇨🇬,  “lamb”. It was actually known in the 19th century already to be a Turkic borrowing all , ultimately  (Borovičok seems to have had doubt about this Iranian origin at 🇨🇬), which according to usual vocalization scheme is bərə in Turkic languages. Connection to  of generally known Turkic origin, notably in 🇨🇬 having the form , is also seen (, by all likelihood a now extinct form). Fay Freak (talk) 18:20, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Does that establish a relation to the game pieces?
 * I have now read a description of the game with drawings of pieces and I suppose it must be compared with, or , but the reconstruction is difficult as Hamp argues "Der traditionelle Vergleich mit uridg. *bʰer- ‘tragen, bringen’ (ved. bhárati, gr. φέρω, got. bairan) ist semantisch schwierig (vgl. dazu Hermann Studi Baltici 3 (1933: 65-68))." The images resemble chess pieces more than spillikins.
 * If you are thinking of the related senses, ie., , I suppose you could be correct in a situation that would be similar to fee and . 88.128.92.197 17:37, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

(pre-save transform) variables and the  (external links) variables (judging by this edit where I added a nowikified link but it doesn't show up in  ). — Eru·tuon 00:02, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Geleia
Hello all. Geleia is the type genus of a protist family, the Geleiidae. But Alfred Kahl in 1935, here, does not seem to have given us the meaning. In Greek we have γελι, geli, to laugh, but I don't think that's the right track, but rather the eponymous name of a person whose name I don't know. What is your opinion ? Thanks in advance for your help. Gerardgiraud (talk) 17:20, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
 * says it's named after Hungarian protistologist József von Gelei (1885-1952). —Mahāgaja · talk 21:02, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Oh thanks @Mahagaja I had not seen this page. Shame on me! Gerardgiraud (talk) 01:19, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

sitar
RFV of the etymology.

The EN WP article at w:Sitar has this as a Hindi derivation meaning "seven strings", sourced to https://books.google.com/books?id=ZOlNv8MAXIEC&lpg=PA334&vq=sitar&pg=PA787#v=snippet&q=sitar&f=false, whereas our entry traces this to Persian for "three strings", but includes no sources. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 22:06, 24 April 2023 (UTC)


 * For those interested, see also the related thread at Reddit. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 22:07, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Cited. Vahag (talk) 10:15, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you! ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 18:27, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Although guitar, cittern and zither apparently all are related, sitar is evidently unrelated to all of them... Wakuran (talk) 00:25, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

tol
Old English. Given that the word exists only in Norse and English, and not in other West Germanic languages, are we sure that is really inherited from Proto-Germanic and not borrowed from Old Norse? —Mahāgaja · talk 10:04, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I've never considered it...nor have I ever come across the suggestion anywhere else before. Leasnam (talk) 02:48, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I've rewritten the etymology to mention both possibilities. —Mahāgaja · talk 07:04, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Since Old Norse still says "cognate with Old English" now, might we want to add something there too for consistency? Simply change to more general "related to"? --Oidfbosizrb (talk) 20:59, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I can never remember what the supposed difference between "cognate with" and "related to" is supposed to be. It seems like a distinction without a difference. —Mahāgaja · talk 07:25, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I try to use "cognate with" when words descended from a parent term. I try to use "related to" when the terms belong to the same family of words, that share the same ultimate root, so it can vary in degrees of relatedness. English shoe is "cognate with" German Schuh, but English shod is "related to" German Schuh (?). But I haven't always abidden [sic] by this in the past. Leasnam (talk) 18:32, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
 * There are several terms unique to only Old Norse and Old English: is one.  is another.  and  are others. This doesn't seem to be too out of the ordinary to me, and I also see this strict grouping sometimes with Old English and Gothic ( & 🇨🇬), and sometimes just between all 3 (excluding all other West Germanic) like, 🇨🇬, and 🇨🇬. Is there anything particularly unique in  which makes it seem more likely to be a borrowing ? Leasnam (talk) 18:53, 6 May 2023 (UTC)
 * You mean in its phonology or semantics? No, probably not. It's really just the grouping of Old Norse + Old English and exclusion of the rest of WGmc that makes me suspect a borrowing. —Mahāgaja · talk 14:22, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Kongo peanut terms
Is there any difference between and, e.g. do they refer to different varieties or sizes or stages of growth, or are they just synonyms? - -sche (discuss) 22:33, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
 * If you compare the derivations, it seems that nguba might refer to the nut, and mpinda to the pod, but that is just a guess. Wakuran (talk) 00:18, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

ἕλκος
If comes from, as seems virtually guaranteed on semantic grounds, why does it start with ? Word-initial PIE *h₁ disappears without a trace before a vowel in Greek, while usually comes from PIE *s or *y. Was it somehow influenced by ? If so, why? There's no particularly close semantic association between the two. —Mahāgaja · talk 09:37, 26 April 2023 (UTC)


 * Everyone assumes folk-etymological influence of, without explaining the motivation. The influence doesn't seem strange to me. Imagine the body being hurt by being dragged against a hard surface. Vahag (talk) 11:52, 26 April 2023 (UTC)


 * It's a drag, alright! Wakuran (talk) 14:56, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

[chobot#Czech|Chobot]]
Our current etymology claims that this is a 19th century borrowing, but I can find it in the Old Czech dictionary, am I missing something? Vininn126 (talk) 19:47, 26 April 2023 (UTC) Sources were found! Vininn126 (talk) 22:35, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

Bangs for hair over forehead
At least the British English version, fringe, makes some obvious sense. My 1969 edition of The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language has this to say:


 * “Perhaps ultimately from Old Norse banga, to cut off (perhaps imitative).”

PaulTanenbaum (talk) 02:28, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
 * 1) Does this constitute sufficient grounds for plugging that into our entry? And if so, is it kosher to do so word for word, or would that infringe IP?
 * 2) Does anybody have better or more authoritative information on this burning question?


 * I note that bang (singular) says "In the sense of a fringe of hair, from bang off", citing no source; it would be good to either find a source for that or remove it. Dictionary.com says bang ("usually bangs") is "an Americanism dating back to 1870–75; short for bangtail"; Merriam-Webster says the same. I can only find 🇨🇬 in the meaning "hammer, bang", not "cut", and Dictionary.com and Merriam-Webster take banga to be related to the other ("beat, pound") sense of, not the hair sense. (On the origin of bangtail Dictionary.com says only "1885–90; bang cut (nasal variant of bag cut < ?) + tail. Cf. pigtail".) - -sche (discuss) 03:12, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I found the bangtail business, but no explanation for its origin. I also did find a second (unsourced) reference for banga = Old Norse to cut off. PaulTanenbaum (talk) 11:48, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Some sound, ie, inconclusive, speculation at Online Etymology Dictionary. DCDuring (talk) 19:12, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I always assumed he rather odd word bangs referred to hair that was 'bang against' the forehead. Surely a bangtail is hair that is 'bang on' a certain length and I suppose it could be the real origin but I can't see how 'bang off' fits in. Am I missing something obvious here? --Overlordnat1 (talk) 00:33, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
 * The noun ("fringe") comes from the verb ("to cut hair, dock [as a horse's tail]") which comes from the adverb ("suddenly, abruptly") from the adjective ("fierce, violent, vehement"), which is probably from the verb ("to strike noisily, explode"). Going on logic, I can envision that holding a horse's tail bunched together with one hand and docking it between the base and where it's held will produce a tuft of hair upon release that appears to "explode" with a "bang". Perhaps this is how the sense developed. Leasnam (talk) 00:38, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I see we don't have an adjective sense, but one is found in Scots and means "fierce, violent, vehement, strong, agile and strong". Usage dates for the Scots cites in SND [] are between 1791 and 1923. Leasnam (talk) 00:42, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Leasnam, you state your etymological thesis quite definitely. But were the situation as clear as your tone suggests, then I doubt it would have escaped those responsible for the American Heritage entry. PaulTanenbaum (talk) 20:58, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
 * , Century, here[] is the only place I could find anything that made any bit of sense; they do show the development, but you have to piece the bits together: the bang2 noun (page centre) comes from the bang2 verb right above it, which comes from the bang1 adverb immediately above that, which ultimately comes from . I was unfortunately unable to verify the Old Norse banga meaning "to cut" mentioned above in any Germanic or Norse reference. I can only find meaning "to knock, strike, hammer, beat". Leasnam (talk) 04:54, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

Outer Manchuria
I provisionally conclude that this sense of this term originates in the 21st century: see. This is a kind of unexpected result for me, which is why I bring it here-- I hope someone more adept can show me wrong, probably easily. I'm looking for unambiguous reference to territory inside Russia called 'Outer Manchuria' from the period 01 Jan 1980 to 12 Dec 1999 (or 01 Jan 1900 to 12 Dec 1999). The cites I have from Henry Kissinger &c. prove that the English langauge term 'Outer Manchuria' can refer to an area in Russia near to China as of circa 2010. But I would like to determine when this specific sense originated in English. For instance, did this term exist in 1990? 1980? Please note that some Google results talk about an 'outer Manchuria' that is inside China (the 'outer part' of Manchuria), for instance: "Like many urban youth of her generation, she was sent to a military farm in the Great Northern Wilderness of outer Manchuria to accept education from farmers and soldiers during the Cultural Revolution in 1969." That seems to be a reference to an area inside the PRC and not a reference to a place in the USSR. Something interesting to me is that I would expect Chiang Kai-shek's English literature from Taiwan to mention ROC claims on 'Outer Manchuria' (the English langauge term) if that term were an established term in the 20th century. Or failing that, I would expect Ivy League texts to mention this term in conjunction with territorial claims of the ROC. Yet I don't see it! (See Talk:Outer Manchuria) --Geographyinitiative (talk) 08:22, 27 April 2023 (UTC) (Modified)


 * (Hey anyone who sees this:-- I know I'm just another online crank, but what I think I've "discovered" here is pretty wild. I'm hoping that someone will totally discount what I've "realized", which is basically: English Wikipedia's Outer Manchuria article is the origin of the term 'Outer Manchuria' (in English) when it refers to the territory ceded by the Manchu Dynasty to the Tsars.-- I recommend bringing this to the (See Talk:Outer Manchuria) page. I am looking forward to being undone, discounted, shamed, and mocked.) --Geographyinitiative (talk) 22:41, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

oaktag
Is this a brand name, or what? This mentions a folkish idea; Collins just says it's "oak" + "tag". - -sche (discuss) 13:58, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
 * We need to figure out which spelling is most common and make the others alt forms rather than divergent duplicates btw. - -sche (discuss) 13:59, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Our definitions of this and similar terms now under the "See also" heading are weak, almost indistinguishable from each other. At the very least some of them differ in usage context, eg, pattern paper (another similar term) is used in apparel manufacture.
 * Oak boards were apparently used to bind parchment books. DCDuring (talk) 15:05, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
 * The tag is from a shortening of tagboard i assume, though we dont have that sense yet, and doesnt solve the question of why tagboard is called that. I always assumed it was called oaktag because it was made from the pulp of oak trees, at least originally, but I suppose that might be difficult to verify.   — Soap — 19:53, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Tagboard is used to make tags, as on merchandise. This source claims it has some oak content. Oak is a very hard, dense wood, and tagboard is said to be hard and difficult to tear- so the connection would seem to make sense. Chuck Entz (talk) 22:29, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

oportet
RFV of the etymology. is third-conjugation. and are second-conjugation verbs. *verteō does not exist. It is problematic in Latin to derive an eh₁(ye)-stative verb from a root thematic verb. --Daniel.z.tg (talk) 23:51, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
 * In Ernout-Meillet the same issue is posed, but no alternative etymology is provided (translated from french): "It has been explained as coming from *op-uortet, from uorteō which would be akin to uertō (cf. τρομέω, τρέμω, and, in meaning, καθήκει). But Latin does not have a verb preverb like the slavonic vrŭtĕti "to turn", and the etymology remains up in the air." cf p.831 --SZC_03 (talk) 21:58, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Hmm. and  have 1st and 3rd conjugation and they come from different stems/suffixes in PIE with  losing the reduplication and having the laryngeal reanalyzed. Now looking at it,  irregular from *opvortet may indicate that the prefix was added in PIE instead of Latin, perhaps to the stative stem  instead. In this case of mixed stems like Ancient Greek, this finally makes sense. Daniel.z.tg (talk) 23:54, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

Mitrovica
Slavic form of former Demetria named after St. Dimiter 2A02:1210:22EC:D600:60F0:409D:13AD:B5D1 02:31, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
 * I guess the ending -ović might be related, in this case. Wakuran (talk) 12:00, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

smombie
At present, we are describing German Smombie as borrowed from English smombie, which we are describing as a "blend of smartphone + zombie." The reference that we cite for the German borrowing labels it a "Neulexem" (neologism) and includes the note:
 * "Smombie kann auch als Lehnwort interpretiert werden (vgl. engl. smombie),"
 * "Smombie can also be interpreted as a loan word (compare English smombie)." [my translation, and with emphasis added]

Do we know anything definitive about these words' history? The reason I ask is that in its discussion of smartphone zombies, Wikipedia's article on smartphones and pedestrian safety asserts that Smombie was the earlier to appear (presumably an English-inspired construction as indicated here in Wiktionary). To substantiate the claim, it cites a piece from The Spectator and an episode of the BBC podcast The English We Speak.

Finding the Wiktionary-Wikipedia disagreement got me curious. Neither that Spectator article nor the Beeb's podcast provided any substantive evidence for which word came first, so I started Googling. That hasn't unearthed anything authoritative. What I have turned up includes a flurry of articles in the popular press that (like that Spectator piece) were all occasioned by Langenscheidt's having anointed Smombie their "Youth Word of 2015." I also did find one peer-reviewed article that says that the term "was coined in Germany in 2015." But it's a paper about safety science and published in Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, so again not an authoritative source for etymology.

On the other hand, not even our own reference strikes me as unambiguous. It calls Smombie a neologism while also saying that it might have been borrowed. If it doesn’t count loan words as neologisms, then our source is of no help at all in settling my question.

Does anyone here know what the actual story is? I'd love to (1) ensure that both our entries are accurate and (2) arrange that they and the Wikipedia article all tell consistent stories. PaulTanenbaum (talk) 22:26, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Who has seen the English word? Even with excessive internet usage in which English-language sources take a higher share of consumed media, I might have not encountered it, while as German it is well-known. You don’t even easily find it when you search for it. Even the quotes given for English usage refer to occurrences on the continent. There are no reliable sources, only our philological experience, particularly as we track primary material, and it says that by how things usually look like, English borrowed from German. But as you see, you can “cite” this claim, and it is the editorial judgment then, relying on the linguistic evidence, which claim of sundry contradicting ones is the better. We also know how claims about language in popular sources use to come about—they don’t have the experience in writing etymology that we have, and even transmit the claims of users who are more clueless than them as authoritative: so if you ask a youth from the slang milieu, of course the term in German is “from English”, which is not wholly untrue, either if it is formed within German according to English wordhoard and word formation rules or within German by employing words borrowed from English. Them youths don’t think that complicated nor exact as we need to write etymologies. Fay Freak (talk) 17:24, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
 * As you say, Fay Freak, we must apply our editorial judgment based on the linguistic evidence, and it’s that evidence that I was requesting. At the moment, en.wiktionary asserts that English smombie was constructed from a pair of English words and that German Smombie was subsequently borrowed from it. What is the linguistic evidence, I wonder, for either of those assertions? And what evidence is there against them? Also, do I understand correctly that you yourself have tracked primary material? If so, then which ones? And what are the results? PaulTanenbaum (talk) 21:52, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
 * You understand wrong, I have “tracked” it in so far as I have not forgotten how it has been used from all usages that have confronted me randomly and that I can search like you for it and the overwhelming appearance in German texts and the circumstance that the few quotes Wiktionary editors have gathered for the English refer back to Germany are typical for its having been German in the first place. One quote or the other will not do it, sometimes it is the general impression of the attestation situation. Often an argument for borrowing is to be made from one term or family of terms being often and regular in one language but less so in the other, perhaps also with particular emphasis of older occurrence. (I speak of occurrences collectively.) Since both languages appear equally well in the media we can access, it is also expected that the order of occurrences there reflects the order of reality of language used in sum: so I could recognize the presumable direct source of well. Or for  also with frequency of patterns being used for a certain function in either language. Does  even sound like it would be likely said in English? I have phonetic concerns about its “transmissibility”. Due to grammatical functions of trailing /s/ and other conflicts in English (sounds exactly like  and  etc.) it would easily be misheard, so a German speaker is more likely to drop the word. Also, note the second option of it having been formed independently in both English and German, it being not super creative to be only possibly invented once, but even then if the German has had success then the scarce English occurrences more likely depend on the existence of the term in German overall. Fay Freak (talk) 22:33, 2 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Perhaps we're best off just noting in each entry the existence of the other and the uncertainty as to which came first. But my anecdotal experience matches Fay Freak's : I've only seen it in German, and it doesn't seem like a likely English formation because the first component isn't recognizable and is easily confused with mombie. - -sche (discuss) 00:32, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I quite agree, I have never encountered it in English. And I’d wager that even if it did have some popularity, it was a nonce word that has since disappeared. Your suggestion seems a good one to me. PaulTanenbaum (talk) 01:47, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Quod erat demonstrandum: In English, all kinds of words begin with sm. In German, smart in certain derivations, of which the smartphone is most evident to govern lives, is the most notorious one. (Since in German that sequence became /ʃm/〈schm〉.) Only in the latter the functional load of the sequences befitted for the term to gain . Fay Freak (talk) 03:21, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Reading through this, the balance of probabilities suggests this was likely an English borrowing from German. Theknightwho (talk) 01:05, 4 May 2023 (UTC)