Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium/2023/May

чокнутый
Maybe related to Macedonian чакнат? Ramalokin (talk) 09:40, 1 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Or чукнат? They both may be just onomatopœic. Tollef Salemann (talk) 17:31, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

Sonderia
Sonderia is a protist type genus of the Sonderiidae family. The name seems to be an eponym but I can't find who is this "Sonder" that Alfred Kahl wanted to honor in 1928. Any idea? Thanks. Gerardgiraud (talk) 05:52, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Maybe ? However, he was a botanist and so might not be an obvious choice as a namesake for a protist. The Wikipedia article mentions some plants named after him, but says nothing about Sonderia or the Sonderiidae. —Mahāgaja · talk 07:16, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks for this lead. Alfred Kahl was born near Hamburg and Otto Wilhelm Sonder practiced in Hamburg. Kahl surely knew Sonder and might have wanted to honor Sonder, for some reason he doesn't seem to mention in his writings. Gerardgiraud (talk) 08:22, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
 * But Kakl is not accustomed to giving the etymology of the taxa he creates. Gerardgiraud (talk) 08:24, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

Proto-Slavic and
@Vininn126 @Thadh @ZomBear @Shumkichi @Bezimenen

This is complicated, don't confuse these lemmas with and, latter is not problematic but is continued in Polish in the same way as.

In East and South Slavic languages group -dl- is always simplified to -l-, because of that lemmas like 🇨🇬 or 🇨🇬 (and other modern descendants) are reconstructed back to 🇨🇬 , and if 🇨🇬 ever existed, it's descendants in modern East and South Slavic languages are homonymous. Sławobóg (talk) 14:10, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

Derksen, however, prefers reconstruction using the same descendants. This is interesting, because 🇨🇬 (after Derksen), 🇨🇬 (after Smoczyński) can't be derived from. For the same reason 🇨🇬 is considered to be borrowing or influenced by some East Slavic word.

My idea is that these are actually 2 separate lexemes, which are homonymous in East/South Slavic languages, but are different in West Slavic languages. I propose creating something like that:
 * : (after Derksen),  (after Smoczyński),  (after Derksen),, , , , , ,
 * : (after Derksen),  (after Smoczyński),  (after Derksen),, , , , , ,

Etymology:
 * : from 🇨🇬 with close or exact cognates: 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬, doublet of (for -e- instead of expected -ě- see ).
 * : Smoczyński suggested from earlier (with anlaut -e- as a result of the influence of ), from 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬 would be exact cognates.

🇨🇬 would be borrowing from East Slavic.

Thoughts? Sławobóg (talk) 14:10, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I’d have appreciated a ping too (see my edits in, , and also: previous discussion in the Scriptorium and Talk:siodło). What do you mean by:
 * "(for -e- instead of expected -ě- see )"
 * ? In the case of the *e is either:
 * due to the word being a (post-Winter’s Law) borrowing from Germanic (Derksen),
 * or just due to the open syllable (it’s *se-dъ-lo after all, compare eg. *voda with *o, not *a).
 * (as reconstructed by Derksen and reflected eg. in Czech, or BCSM – note clear jať reflex here, different form ) is the expected regular Proto-Slavic form with lengthening before *d due to Winter’s Law (if we accept the law is true, *sedlo with the closed syllable *sed- is impossible in Proto-Slavic) – having reflexes of the expected *sědlo actually attested in both West and South Slavic, it doesn’t seem reasonable to me to postulate *sedlo. // Silmeth @talk 14:51, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Also this claim:
 * "-e- instead of expected -ě- (cf. *sěděti, *sědlo) is explained by irregular phonetic development caused by frequency."
 * sounds a bit weird to me. Why would the verb not get shortened then, since presumably it’d be much more frequently used, than the noun? (the verb hypothetically also could be without lengthening due to open syllables – but there are forms with closed syllables, like *sěsti, *sědlъ, so even if we assume Winter’s Law didn’t operate on open syllables, there’s still models for analogy keeping the length in open-syllable forms). // Silmeth @talk 15:10, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Sorry for pinging you, I missed you somehow. I added that explanation because that is only one that I found. Noone (besides Derksen) considers these words to be borrowings from Germanic, actually Boryś and Snoj say that Germanic words might be from Proto-Slavic. Polish, Czech, ORV, OCS point out at *sedlo/*selo. What is explanation for OCS words always being , , , or 🇨🇬 without jať?
 * Czech and BCSM  point towards *sědlo. Polish, , Czech ,  (the fact the two agree, btw, IMO is a fair argument they’re both inherited, not borrowed – although there could be OCS influence on Czech and then Czech on Polish… or later analogical changes, see below) point towards *selo without d. Polish  indeed suggests *sedlo, especially in place-names like Długosiodło (and maybe words like siedlisko, siedliszcze –  but they have variants sielisko, sieliszcze in OPl.; and then there’s OPl. siadlisko suggesting jať in them…).
 * So as I see it, we have two options:
 * 1. To follow Derksen and reconstruct two separate PSl. forms:
 * PSl. *selo (>, , , , , , etc.),
 * and *sědlo (>, , , and also inflicting influence on the semantics of Polish < PSl. *sedъlo).
 * The situation being messy because in the east and mostly in the south *selo and *sědlo merged early without trace of jať (due to similarity between late forms *selo and *sělo after the simplification of -dl- cluster in those branches) – but again note preserving jať.
 * 2. Alternatively we could reconstruct *sedlo with Old Polish borrowing *selo early (sioło attested in 1461 acc. to Słownik staropolski, presence of umlaut + simplification of -dl-), and explaining Old Czech siedlo > Czech sídlo, and Serbo-Croatian sijelo as influence from the verb *sěsti, *sěděti – but this seems less straightforward to me (especially since it goes against Winter’s Law). But that actually is the way Elektronický slovník staré češtiny explains OCz. siedlo (no dates for attestation of sedlo vs siedlo though). Another piece supporting this would be Old Czech sedlský with d and without jať (but how does it fit with modern selský?).
 * I don’t know how Baltic data fits into this, but that’s what I see from Slavic perspective.
 * Anyway, I think we should be careful in how we deal with this and we should note all the difficulties and conflicting data (and shouldn’t dismiss Derksen’s reconstructions too easily). // Silmeth @talk 20:08, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
 * @Silmethule I don't dismiss Derksen's reconstruction here, I think we should have 3 lemmas: *sědlo, *sedlo, *selo. If is inherited from *sědlo, then it is evidence that jat' doesn't disappear after change -dl- > -l-. If it's post-PS formation, then it should be removed from PS page. If disappearance of jat' after -dl- > -l- was an actual thing, linguists would mention it. Semantics also speaks against such a division: descendants of *sědlo always mean "seat", descendants of *sedlo always mean "village" and these never cross (🇨🇬 might be *sedlo semantically influenced by *sědlo ). Even if you want to believe that jat' just disappeared, 🇨🇬 and 🇨🇬 are hard evidence that *sedlo existed, and that lets us to connect East/South Slavic words to *sedlo instead of *sědlo.
 * BTW Machek (machine transl):
 * "PS *sedlo is different from *sedъlo, because there was no yer in it, which is evident from the forms where dl gave only l. In view of this, it is odd to consider -dlo as a suffix (and not its d as part of the root). Then the root part would not be from *sedět, but from the original *sě-, from the root *kˢei- (our ), which meant holding agricultural property, living on a rural estate: 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬, 🇨🇬,,, 🇨🇬, dwells, resides somewhere. Although the suffix tra is somewhat different, but in our country it is replaced by dlo in the same function in other words. Especially and  fit our sědlo well; Although tra is a slightly different suffix, in our country it is replaced by dlo in the same function in other words. The pre-Slavic ancestor for the term 'sídlo' was *kˢoi-dhlo-, which would be PS sědlo. It was shortened to e, among other reasons (tendency to merge ě and e; shortening effect of 'long' suffixes like -jak-) also probably due to the verb to seděti, because it (and 🇨🇬 etc., ) is used metaphorically for live on your own farm. 🇨🇬 etc. is from Slavic."
 * Sławobóg (talk) 20:03, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

19:20, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
 * *kṣu- natively but Prakrits can give jh and then loaned into Sanskrit like with ~, not from Dravidian there isnt a similar term in dr
 * AleksiB 1945 (talk) 21:01, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
 * OIA -jjh- originates from PIE *-gʰs-, not *dʰǵʰ. You also can't overlook the vowel quality. -- 00:46, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
 * there is Hindi from  but after an e if not where does this Prakritic like word come from? AleksiB 1945 (talk) 04:44, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

percontor
RFV of the etymology. Specifically, why exactly is "from cūnctor" called "but semantically unconvincing"? I can think of two parallels: Daniel.z.tg (talk) 08:44, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Etymology of from
 * https://jisho.org/word/%E6%8E%9B%E3%81%91%E3%82%8B 17. to argue (in court); to deliberate (in a meeting); to present (e.g. idea to a conference, etc.)
 * 裁判に掛ける
 * The question is before the committee.

曬
RFV of the etymology. " to share; to show: Partly influenced by English share."

I believe this is from, or at least the two are related. – Wpi (talk) 11:59, 20 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Yeah, I don't think it has to do with the English word. — justin(r)leung { (t...) 16:56, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

Papaver
Since late 2007 we've said that the flower genus got its name in the 1700s when Linnaeus assigned a descriptive name based on a Latin word for milk. This is clearly not true, as the word is attested classically with the exact meaning it still has today.

I suspect people have been reluctant to remove the etymology from Papaver because it is cited to two well-known botany textbooks, both of which seem inaccessible to me and to the wider Internet. I suspect that one of the following is true: Does anyone have access to either of these books? The milk theory seems like a credible etymology, as I say above, for the original Latin word, though I wouldn't give it top billing either. It's worth noting that we don't list milk as one of the meanings of Latin, though I can see how a word for baby food could mean milk just as much, particularly when a baby is just learning to speak. We even have the same double meaning with English.
 * 1) These books, despite their recent publication dates, are largely based on old knowledge and are in this case incorrect.
 * 2) The books are actually speaking of the etymology of the classical Latin word; in this case, it is no more than a guess, but it is a credible one and could be listed alongside the etymologies we have on the lowercase papaver page.
 * 3) The books don't contain speculation on the etymology of Papaver at all, other than to say it comes from the Latin word, and the additional etymology we have was taken from another source but not listed.

Whether or not we can track down the books, I think the etymology of the Papaver page should be changed to say it comes from the classically attested Latin word, as seems plain with the knowledge we have today, even if it was codified as the scientific name by Linnaeus.

Thanks, — Soap — 12:14, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Linnaeus was often influenced by the shared apparent chemical characteristics of plants. Milky sap would be one of such features. He might well have looked beyond the Latin word itself to its origins, however speculative by our current standards. It should be possible to find reference to pappa in proximity to Papaver in some work of Linnaeus/Linne/Linnaeum/Linné/Linnæus, but I was defeated in my amateurish efforts. DCDuring (talk) 15:43, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Our etymology is indeed nonsense. Linnaeus can only be credited with the first publication of the name in modern taxonomy. His publication of the genus in references  description of the genus, published in French in 1690 and in Latin translation in 1700 (this is the 1719 edition). His description of Papaver sominiferum in the 1753  references descriptions of the species in non-Linnaean nomenclature going back to, written by  in the first century AD. As you can see, he merely adapted an existing Latin name with a long history into the Linnaean system of nomenclature. Modern taxonomy of plants by definition starts with Linnaeus, but that's taxonomy, not etymology.
 * Another theory I've seen is that papaver got its name because it was mixed with the pap fed to infants in order to keep them quiet, though that may just be folk etymology or outdated. Chuck Entz (talk) 18:25, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
 * https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/papaver#Latin
 * Look under small-p papaver, the right answer comes up. It is an old Latin word, possibly derived from pehr- (fire). 24.108.18.81 01:20, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I think we were allowing for why Linnaeus didn't, say, choose the Greek word for poppy instead. He might have influenced by something to do with the "milky" sap. DCDuring (talk) 01:09, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

hulımaq
It's a bit weird that Khalaj - cognate with Turkish, because of their meanings (to vomit and to howl respectively)

It remains the possibility - cognate with. Maybe yes maybe no

Maybe they're cognates 'cuz of phonetic similarities

Maybe they're not cuz of meanings
 * I don't think the semantic shift feels too unlikely, as you could spew out either sound or rotten food. You can compare English croak and crake with Swedish kräkas. Wakuran (talk) 11:34, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

Sanaa (Yemen)
It seems reasonable to suppose that Sanaa is derived From صَنَعَ (ṣanaʕa, “to manufacture”). Can anyone say why this should not be so? Can anyone think of a better explanation? 24.108.18.81 21:45, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
 * According to Wikipedia, "The name Sanaa is probably derived from the Sabaic root ṣnʿ, meaning "well-fortified"." I'm not versed enough in Semitic languages to tell whether the Arabic word would be related. Wakuran (talk) 22:03, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia mentions third-century inscriptions, which would put the origins back to pre-Islamic times when Arabic (not to be confused with ) was just one of a number of languages spoken in the region. Chuck Entz (talk) 00:05, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Sabaean was a Semitic language, related to Arabic, so you would expect such a basic concept as "manufacture" to be similar in phonology. And "fortify" and "manufacture" are close in meaning. There does not seem to be a conflict. 24.108.18.81 00:12, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
 * means “to fortify” inasmuch as it means “work”, so “to work upon” a building, since the closer one is to the Tropics, the less there is any actual work other than occasionally collecting fruits and hunting, so of course back in the day, when machines did not afford so many jobs, construction work was the best known. You see how later it would mean “to manifacture” in Arabic; in Aramaic instead forming meanings related to plotting, scheming, acting cleverly and even putting, placing, hiding a thing, while from the direction of doing something cleverly parallelling Arabic  not only meant a dolose scheme but also a “well-crafted thing”. With Ethiopic it is clear that all goes back to Proto-West Semitic.
 * They probably mean this second-century inscription (of 267 Ḥimyarite era). In an Early Sabaic inscription it is apparently only the name of a wall. But I found it again as a town-name in Qatabānian, and again in Ḥaḍramitic. Due to some mythology, the Sabaeans seem more popular nowadays than the other Old-South Arabian peoples. Fay Freak (talk) 12:28, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanx for posting this at Sanaa! 24.108.18.81 18:40, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
 * But the longer is much more copiously found, only in Sabaean. Fay Freak (talk) 12:31, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
 * It seems that Sabaic and Sabaean are synonyms for the same language, just in case someone would be confused. Wakuran (talk) 23:17, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

Outer Manchuria
One question: Are there cites for 'Outer Manchuria' (as the 1858/1860 ceded territories) from before the English Wikipedia article in 2004? (See Citations:Outer Manchuria.) Please send me any links/books/cites you find (for all senses) that are not already at Citations:Outer Manchuria, even if you're not sure what sense they fall under. Alternately, send any arguments that I misclassified any of the cites. cf. , Brazilian aardvark --Geographyinitiative (talk) 11:44, 23 May 2023 (UTC)


 * I have the same question. Never seen any mention of "Внешняя Маньчжурия" in no older Russian book. It is also very weird to use this name about non-Manchurian areas. May it be a Chinese term? Tollef Salemann (talk) 15:32, 23 May 2023 (UTC)


 * I have provisionally concluded that 'Outer Manchuria' referring to Russian/Soviet territory did not exist until the May 2004 Wikipedia article and that this is likely a bona fide case of citogenesis (creation of a word or sense by a Wikipedia editor who is then relied on in other sources). I think it's easy to imagine how one could see the area as 'Outer Manchuria', because there are indeed references to 'coastal' Manchuria in some works. But just because 'Manchuria' could apply to modern Manchuria in China + the territories ceded in 1858 and 1860 to Russia does not mean that those 1858 & 1860 territories were referred to as 'Outer Manchuria'-- that specific nomeclature needs independent proof. And the Google Ngrams show a sudden spike of 'Outer Manchuria' from 2004. And the cites before 2004 do not seem to think of areas inside Russia as "outer Manchuria". It's a really fun issue to look into, and it's very relevant to current events since a government office in China (PRC) recently (Feb 2023) updated their official Chinese character nomeclature usage rules for the names of eight locations inside Russia to reflect their viewpoint about the 1858 & 1860 cessions- see the recent cites on Citations:Haishenwai. I really hope you all will check my work and get to the bottom of this- I don't trust myself, but the facts *seem* to support this conclusion. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 13:43, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

dối
Proto-Vietic *p.to:jʔ.

Revisiting Vietnamese Softened Onsets Resulting from the Loss of Vietic presyllables | Mark Alves - Academia.edu

(However no further comparison with modern Vietics is provided.) 汩汩银泉 (talk) 10:37, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

鮮卑
RFV of the etymology. — justin(r)leung { (t...) 21:25, 25 May 2023 (UTC)


 * I would assume this is copied from Xianbei, which references as a source for *serbi. (I can't judge the quality of the source since that area is obviously not my expertise.) – Wpi (talk) 19:15, 26 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Any idea? RcAlex36 (talk) 17:02, 4 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Given Shimunek's credentials (CV) I think Shimunek (2018) (cited by wikipedia) is a reliable source (disclosure: I edited the Xianbei article yet I do not remember making that edit which sourced Shimunek (2018)). The earliest source [EDIT: which I can find so far] which contains the reconstruction *Särbi/Serbi is Pelliot (1928). Erminwin (talk) 02:17, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

car
RFV of English Etymology 2, with the sense "a turn". At present this is identified as an isolated use with Shakespeare's Sonnet VII, line 9. The current etymology reads: "However, anything other than a "turn" does not seem to make any sense within the broader context of the cited Sonnet." This isn't true: it is rather obvious that the "weary car" in question refers to the chariot of the Sun; interpretations agree on this unanimously, as far as I am aware. -蒼鳥 fawk. tell me if i did anything wrong. 22:50, 27 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Some additional remarks (partly in reply to a comment that got reverted when I was mid-replying): at Shakespeare's time, it had been a well-established poetic metaphor, sourced from and/or reinforced by the Greek myths, that the Sun rode in a chariot. For instance, WS himself used it in Richard III, 5.3, in rather reminiscent wording: "The weary sun hath made a golden set, / And by the bright track of his fiery car." In comparison, the reading "a weary turn" feels contrived, if possible at all. It also seems phonologically ungrounded: iirc the postulated Proto-Germanic etymon would expect in Old English, and subsequently in Modern English as well.
 * At any rate, the claim that "anything other than a 'turn' does not seem to make any sense within the broader context of the cited Sonnet" is just false. (Also, an isolated use would fail Wiktionary's Criteria for Inclusion anyway, but that's neither here nor there.) 蒼鳥 fawk. tell me if i did anything wrong. 17:46, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Agreed. It is certainly a reference to Greek mythology. Nicodene (talk) 22:05, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
 * If this word is cognate to, etymology 3 (see char) it might be turn in the sense of a move in a game, i.e. "it's your turn", and not a steering. Indeed chore seems to be a direct  cognate.  And yet, the cognates in other Germanic languages hint at the fact that maybe those two senses aren't so far apart after all. There is also a theory that the intensive prefix ker- developed from an unpalatalized cognate of this word, though Im skeptical. — Soap — 02:04, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
 * No, this was added by a user with a long history of getting things confused, so I wouldn't try too hard to scrape up an obscure etymological explanation to back them up. Remember that we're talking about a poetic figure of speech used by Shakespeare in a sonnet accompanied by other references that fit quite well. No need to look for something that would make sense if read literally. Chuck Entz (talk) 02:38, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
 * The use of the mythological metaphor in Richard III 5.3 clinches it. --Lambiam 13:28, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

phát
1026 PMK *cpaat

Shorto, H. L., Sidwell, P., Cooper, D. (linguist), & Bauer, C. (2006). A Mon-Khmer comparative dictionary. Pacific Linguistics, Research School of Pacific and Asian Studies, The Australian National University. 汩汩银泉 (talk) 08:05, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

外東北
Outer Manchuria is a neologism, see this 2011 convo: So: How old is 外東北-- how old is this exact terminology with reference to the 1858/1860 ceded territories? The first Baidu Baike edit is May 2006 and the first Zh Wikipedia edit is July 2005. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 23:09, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

"Greece" - considerations of the name?
It is well known that "Greece" derives from Magna Graecia, the Greek settlement in southern Italy. And that this derives from Γραικός, meaning "inhabitant of Γραῖα".

I am interested to examine this Γραῖα. It appears to derive from γηραιά "the ancient (city)", which may be an honorary title rather than an actual name. If so, what and where was it?

There are 3 other names we are given:

1. Τάναγρα (ταναός + γηραιά "large ancient (city)", a variation of the above;

2. Ποιμανδρία (ποιμήν + ἀνδρός + -ία), "shepherd place";

3. Ὠρωπός (possibly "foot of the mountain" though this is debatable).

Sorting all this out, it seems that (2) is most likely the original name, as shepherd was one of the original professions. If Γραῖα was an honorary name, it may have applied to an extended area, especially considering the number of people who claimed to have originated there. In that case, all of the above may have been included in Γραῖα.

Any thoughts on this? 24.108.18.81 16:34, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Reading through Minoica (Festschrift zum 80. Geburtstag von Johannes Sundwall, de Gruyter, 1958) there's a similar Mycenaean word for a body of elders, which would be equivalent to the semantics of senate. But I am not sure it's the same and I am unsure especially as to what your question is a pro-pos "the original name" – of what, the Old World?
 * More recently, Michele Bianconi (“The Etymology of Gerga and the Carian Word for ‘White.’” Historische Sprachforschung / Historical Linguistics, vol. 133, Vandenhoek-Ruprecht, 2020, pp. 27–42) does not mention it, but argues that placenames of that shape exist like the proverbial sand on the beach in the Aegeis (or greater Mediterranean), if that's what you mean. 2A00:20:604A:E02:B11:2D2D:EA8E:3F01 14:36, 10 June 2023 (UTC)