Wiktionary:Etymology scriptorium

Wiktionary > Discussion rooms > Etymology scriptorium

WT:ES redirects here. For help with edit summaries, see Help:Edit summary. For information about Spanish entries on Wiktionary, see Wiktionary:About Spanish.

WT:RFE redirects here. To make a Request for an Entry, see Wiktionary:Requested entries.

Click here to start a new Etymology scriptorium discussion.

Wiktionary discussion rooms (edit) see also: requests

Information desk start a new discussion | this month | archives Newcomers’ questions, minor problems, specific requests for information or assistance.

Tea room start a new discussion | this month | archives Questions and discussions about specific words.

Etymology scriptorium start a new discussion | this month | archives Questions and discussions about etymology—the historical development of words.

Beer parlour start a new discussion | this month | archives General policy discussions and proposals, requests for permissions and major announcements.

Grease pit start a new discussion | this month | archives Technical questions, requests and discussions.

All Wiktionary: namespace discussions 1 2 3 4 5 – All discussion pages 1 2 3 4 5

Etymology scriptorium

Welcome to the Etymology scriptorium. This is the place to cogitate on etymological aspects of the Wiktionary entries.

Etymology scriptorium archives edit
2026 January February March April May June July August September October November December 2025 January February March April May June July August September October November December
Earlier years 2024 January February March April May June July August September October November December 2023 January February March April May June July August September October November December 2022 January February March April May June July August September October November December 2021 January February March April May June July August September October November December 2020 January February March April May June July August September October November December 2019 January February March April May June July August September October November December 2018 January February March April May June July August September October November December 2017 January February March April May June July August September October November December 2016 January February March April May June July August September October November December 2015 January February March April May June July August September October November December 2014 January February March April May June July August September October November December 2013 January February March April May June July August September October November December 2012 February March April May June July August September October November December 2011 January March April May June July October November December 2010 February March April May June August September October November December 2009 February March August

July 2026

Pannonian Rusyn галайк (halajk)

Any ideas? Also exists in dialectal Slovak as halaj or halajk as well. Dijacz (talk) 05:47, 1 July 2026 (UTC)

Onomatopoeic. See pp. 222–223. Vahag (talk) 08:47, 1 July 2026 (UTC)

Thanks! Dijacz (talk) 09:15, 1 July 2026 (UTC)

payt

Uzbek. What is its source? It is also found in Uyghur and has been borrowed into Transoxanian varieties of Persian. Rizozoda34 (talk) 23:02, 1 July 2026 (UTC)

Spacken/Spacko

We have this derived from spack (“skinny”), which feels unlikely. I've always understood it as derived from Spastiker (just as the English spack and spacko come from spastic), and the earliest use I can find on Google Books is 1974 and is definitely an offensive reference to a person with cerebral palsy. Should I change this, or is there a genuine reason to think this comes from a dialectal adjective meaning something totally different? Smurrayinchester (talk) 09:28, 2 July 2026 (UTC)

I associate Spacken with northern German, as a mild insult (“annoying person”), not necessarily linked to cerebral palsy (that would be Spasti). If it's really originally from northern Germany, that would speak for a derivation from spack (adjective) and not Spastiker. Jberkel 10:28, 2 July 2026 (UTC)

For the semantics, Danish skør and Norwegian sprø follow the same 'brittle' -> 'crazy' evolution. Wakuran (talk) 10:46, 2 July 2026 (UTC)

I do not see how this works synchronically. For a similar case see diminutives Muskel / Mucki. A few examples seem to go at least to Proto-Germanic, note muck, mud, but onomatopoeic Matsch. The Slavic substrate gives metathesis in Gdansk / Danzig, Lipsk / Leipzig, and note uncertainly Moskau. Whereas the Celtic substrate gives *mokkus, it would be possible to think of Mast, mästen. Also with tz rather than st see motzen, Meckern, and Latin loanwords monieren (admonish from earlier amonesten) and Makulatur, but Macke (“blemish”) apparently from מכּה (mkh). Wüste (“wasteland”), vast, vanus and vacant appear to be related through PIE, even.

I can't quite put my finger on it though I concur as a child I perceived Spacko as a slightly milder synonym of Spast and Spastiker. Today, however, I would think to the contrary, that the inflationary usage of Spast comes from Spacko and not from Greek. Other than English spastics, are there languages where a North Germanic influence is less likely that corroborate the slur?

To spew, spit / Spucke has an East Central German sound change. At the moment, we do not have spack (“brushwood”), that is adduced for spack, but in English spack / [spoke]] we have a cognate to Speiche, which is used as nickname and obviously with sounds that make speien / spucken a rather likely analogy. This leaves English spack unexplained. ~2026-37757-93 (talk) 03:26, 3 July 2026 (UTC)

I am from the capital of disabled work where Low German was extinct in the 1970s already (in fact I have never met anyone speaking with any trace of Westphalian dialect, though its accent stays, and the newspaper archives don’t have articles I would expect if there were people left active in it, which there is for smaller towns nearby) and don’t know the adjective spack (learning about it exactly now; Gerhart Hauptmann is bad literature per Eduard Engel) while I know Spacken, Spack, Spacko, Spasti, Spast very well from pickney: it was always understood that Spack is an alteration of Spast and the terms are synonymous references to behaviour. So Smurrayinchester’s observation is genuine. IP has provided great analogy for the sound alteration. Fay Freak (talk) 19:11, 3 July 2026 (UTC)

Reconstruction:Latin/permanesco

Presumably this term should be etymologized as permaneō +‎ -ēscō. I don't really know a lot about Proto-Romance so I'm not willing to edit the etymology myself. Graearms (talk) 13:56, 2 July 2026 (UTC)

Yes, see Nascentes in the entry PERMANECER. Xwefeld (talk) 21:27, 2 July 2026 (UTC)

Seminole

Creek simanó:li, alteration of simaló:ni, in turn alteration of American Spanish cimarrón "wild, untamed". JMGN (talk) 17:18, 2 July 2026 (UTC)

sestercentenary

Discussion moved from User talk:Sgconlaw.

I see you've changed the etymology to "sester-" (a prefix meaning "two and a half") + "centenary", but this is incorrect. "Sester-" isn't a prefix meaning "two and a half"; a sestercentenary isn't "two and a half centenaries". The prefix is "ses-", from Latin semis, meaning half less than the following unit, a tercentenary; i.e. half a centenary less than three centenaries. In the same way, we would form sesquadricentennial for a three-hundred fiftieth anniversary, or sesquincentennial for a four-hundred fiftieth, but there aren't prefixes such as "sesquadri-" and "sesquin-" with the meanings "three and a half" and "four and a half". They mean "half less than a quadricentennial" and "half less than a quincentennial". I hope you don't think I'm splitting hairs here, because I think this is an important distinction, etymologically. P Aculeius (talk) 21:14, 3 July 2026 (UTC)

@P Aculeius: we literally have an entry sester- defined as "two and a half". If the word sestercentenary was formed in English, I would have thought that sester- + centenary would be a more probable origin than Latin sēmis +‎ English tercentenary. Be that as it may, I was unable to find the word (and thus any evidence of its etymology) from the usual sources such as the Collins English Dictionary, Dictionary.com, Merriam-Webster Online, and the OED, so I'm reposting your message here for more views on the matter. — Sgconlaw (talk) 06:21, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

You might find it under sestertius, the coin, which is not from a Latin prefix "ses-" but from semis + tertius, "half less than three", not "sester-" + the equally non-existent "tius". P Aculeius (talk) 12:07, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

As for the entry created earlier this year under "sester-", it's completely erroneous, and should not exist. There has never been such a prefix in Latin, and you will not find it in Latin dictionaries (I have verified this in Cassell's, Bantam, and Lewis & Short ). The creator misunderstood how words such as sestertius (Latin) and sestercentenary (English) are formed, and simply assumed it was "sester-" + "centenary". In every combination in which this exact string occurs, it is semis- added to another word: sestertius, sestertium, sestertiarius, sestertiolum. But in its shortened form (ses- ), semis- also occurs in the combination sesqui-, which unlike "sester-" is actually a prefix (-que being a Latin suffix meaning "and"). This occurs in words such as sesquipedalian (having a foot and a half) and sesquicentennial (a centennial and a half). You can't have something "quipedalian" ("having and a foot") or "quicentennial" ("and a centennial"); those don't make sense. But we do have tertius ("three") and tercentenary ("a three hundredth anniversary"). P Aculeius (talk) 12:32, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

@P Aculeius: you may well be right that there was no prefix sester- in Latin, but it is plausible that such a prefix was formed in English, based on a misunderstanding of Latin. If so, it doesn't make it "wrong" in English, it just is what it is. We are a descriptive, not a prescriptive dictionary. I don't think we can assume that only prefixes and suffixes which existed in etymon languages like Greek and Latin form "legitimate" prefixes and suffixes in English. Anyway, it looks like we need more sources to find out the answer. I hope some editors active here can help. — Sgconlaw (talk) 13:26, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

I don't see any justification for assuming that the persons who coined such words in English did not know any Latin and could not correctly parse words like sestertius (or at least consult a Latin dictionary, such as Lewis & Short, when attempting to do so). In fact they would have to have been remarkably ignorant to derive it from "sester-" plus a meaningless "tius". But these English words are learned coinages, made by erudite persons who almost certainly had studied Latin in school—standard practice in 19th century grammar schools—and would never have thought that there was such a thing as a "tius" of which you could have a "sester" number. P Aculeius (talk) 14:12, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

As noted below, these are not, as I misremembered, 19th century coinages. Though I still think that we should default to assuming that those using the term correctly understood the words they based them on—if they even bothered to parse them carefully—rather than that they wrongly guessed a different etymology for which there is no evidence, ancient or modern. P Aculeius (talk) 14:38, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

@P Aculeius *sesquadricentenary and cie. don't exist, there is no sēs-; in the end "of a value of half (a unit) under three" or 3 - 0.5 is the same as 2 + 0.5. I deem the etymological dichotomy to be relevant at the Latin level only, putting it as two and a half is more in line with our arithmetics. I will update sēstertius. Saumache (talk) 09:48, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

I was simply trying to explain how semis- formed words in the abbreviated form ses-, rather than constituting part of a non-existent prefix "sester-". While such a string of letters exists in the Latin word sestertius and words derived from it, that is from semis- plus tertius, not from "sester-" plus a non-existent "tius", which is nonsensical. When learned coinages such as sestercentenary were popular (late 19th century), there were not a great many things being celebrated as 350th or 450th anniversaries, so there was not much call for words describing them; the only likely example, at least in America, might have been the anniversary of Columbus' voyages, for which there was a quadricentennial exposition in 1892, but there was no notable observation of its 350th anniversary in 1842 (there were not yet many Italian-Americans promoting celebrations of their heritage, at a time when nativist movements were at their height), and there was little attention given to the 450th anniversary in 1942, as the United States was just entering World War II, and the fashion for learned coinages had passed). My point was that we would form such words with semis- abbreviated to ses-, added to quadricentennial or quincentennial, without there being any prefixes "sesquadri-" or "sesquin-". P Aculeius (talk) 12:43, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

@P Aculeius It's called metanalysis, sēstertius was reinterpreted as sēster-tius within English, no matter how nonsensical it might seem to you, languages are filled with these things, nonsensical until they stop being so. How would you account for Category:English terms prefixed with sester- anyway? Again, sēs- only appears in sēstertius, it's no Latin prefix, there is nothing historical to sester-'s use within English. Saumache (talk) 13:36, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

You may note that the same person who created "sester-" also created "English terms prefixed with 'sester-'", added the erroneous etymology to each of the items in the list, and then added them to that category. That person also explicitly noted that this was "surface analysis", not actual etymology.

And your assertions are unsupported: who do you claim—apart from Wiktionary editors—reinterpreted "sestertius" as "sester-" + "tius"? Certainly nobody familiar either with Latin or with Roman coinage (in the numismatic sense). It is the erroneous guess of a Wiktionary editor. Misunderstanding the etymology of a word does not cause it to have been derived from a new source; folk etymology is not actual etymology. And ses- does not "only" appear in sestertius. It also appears in several words derived from sestertius, and in the legitimate prefix sesqui-, which actually does mean "and a half", -qui being from the Latin suffix -que, "and". There is, however, no Latin suffix "-ter", meaning "three". There are a few other Latin words beginning with ses-, although in most cases this is from the number sex-, "six", rather than semis-.

On what basis are you asserting that the people who coined sestercentennial, sestercentenary, etc. were completely ignorant of the etymology of words like sestertius, and coined them without understanding what they meant or how? Latin scholarship was quite common in the 19th century, and erudite persons were very likely to have studied Latin and been familiar with the roots of such words. I see no basis for assuming that they would have regarded sestertius as consisting of "sester-" plus the nonsensical "tius". P Aculeius (talk) 14:03, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

@P Aculeius, Saumache: maybe you can find some sources to help determine the correct position? Also, I did a search at the Internet Archive and it looks like the word was only coined in the 1980s; I don't see any earlier uses. (It's very rare.) — Sgconlaw (talk) 14:14, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

The best evidence in OED (which has an entry under "sester", but this is from the Roman measure sextarius, a sixth, formerly used in English as a unit of liquid measure) is under sesqui:

...A Latin prefix [L. sesqui-, also sesque-, contraction of *sēmis-que a half in addition; cf. sestertius :–*sēmis-tertius]...

thus demonstrating that ses- in both sesqui- and sestertius (along with its derivatives) is understood to be a contraction of semis-, rather than an otherwise unaccounted-for prefix in sesqui-, and "sester-" plus "tius" in sestertius. P Aculeius (talk) 14:27, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

You are right about the dates. I created the entries and misremembered the quotations as being very old. I withdraw my comments about these terms being 19th century coinages, though I still believe they are learned coinages, and unlikely to have been created through ignorance of what the Latin words they are based on actually meant. Would you dare publish a novel word if you weren't certain that you'd got it right? In any case, I don't think it would be proper to assume that those who used the words misunderstood the construction of their Latin models, and failed to look up what they meant and why; by default we should assume that they share the same etymology, unless there is direct evidence to the contrary. And so far I have not found any. P Aculeius (talk) 14:35, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

sēsqui- had not come to my mind. grue, bleen are blends, -holic, -burger, and cruenter for a classical example of metanalysis/rebracketing, there are recent morphological "errors" such as French covoiturer, sester- is not an error nor were its coiners strictly unlatinate, the term is indeed quite fresh (1980s onward according to Google books for both sestercentenary/sestercentennial) and modern English is rife with clippings, blends and clipped blends, the fact that *sesquart- and others do not exist but sester- does besides Latin sēstertius is telling; meaningful morphological segments are quite often truncated nowadays, compare domoprednate and a host more of scientific jargon. I failed to find a perfect pair to match sester- but I don't think it is unaccountable, I stand with my sester(tius)-centenary. Anyway, this one is fringe as is its morphology. Saumache (talk) 16:28, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

You "stand with" your unsupported guess, and now adding it to the other words formed in this way, even though there's no evidence that it was derived from two nonsense words instead of two genuine Latin words by analogy to sestertius, and at the same time deleting the etymology derived from actual Latin roots and supported by the explanation in the OED. I don't see how forcing a completely nonsensical etymology into entries comports with either verifiability or consensus. P Aculeius (talk) 02:17, 5 July 2026 (UTC)

It just crossed my mind it might just be haplology: sester(ce)-centenary/centennial. sesterterpene is isolated and not temporally congruent; sester- is hardly a prefix. I'd propose we delete the page. Saumache (talk) 06:05, 6 July 2026 (UTC)

Now you've changed it to an even more absurd etymology for which there's still no support! We have an authoritative source that clearly explains that ses- is an abbreviated form of semis- in compounds such as ses-tertius, "half less than three", and sesqui-, "and a half"; and which, by analogy, perfectly accounts for a ses-tercentenary, "half less than a three-hundredth anniversary".

But ahead of this, you prefer (1) the entirely unsupported belief that people have been misunderstanding the formation of sestertius as a non-existent "sester-" plus a completely nonsensical "tius", and now (2) the even stranger notion that they're blending the name of the coin sestertius with "centenary" and centennial ! By this logic, we should define quincentennial as a blend of quinarius and centennial (or maybe the fruit quince and the nonsense word tennial ).

Why isn't it easier to believe that people coining a new Latin word actually knew what they were doing, or at least bothered to look up similar words in a dictionary and form it accordingly, than to imagine a series of nonsensical ways that they might have randomly formed a word that just happens to makes perfect sense when parsed as ordinary Latin? P Aculeius (talk) 11:59, 6 July 2026 (UTC)

ses- does not exist, it was never lexicalized, sester(ce)- is again the only segment attested besides Latin sēstertius and English sesterce, your theory is nothing but likely; your view of English word formation is too conservative and I tried to change your mind about what aren't morphological "errors", failling to show openmindedness about this is sad, here are some recent haplological blends/affixations:

• monomial
• crimmigration
• symbology
• voluntourism

This is a deaf men's talk. Saumache (talk) 17:28, 6 July 2026 (UTC)

Sorry to be the object of your pity. Also that the editors of the OED were too stupid to know that they were completely wrong about the formation of sesqui- and sestertius. Perhaps you should type up a sharply-worded letter and send it to them. P Aculeius (talk) 17:43, 6 July 2026 (UTC)

I said NOTHING about the formation of either of these two words, this is pointless... Saumache (talk) 20:05, 6 July 2026 (UTC)

It seems about time that we purged the months of these huckstress affixes and etymologies; see the many pending user talk, BP, RFV, etc. threads Hftf (talk) 08:26, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

Both of you report 1980s evidence, could you post the citations? The entry's date bracket rests on them and the earliest quotation is 2013. If the hits are Google Books serials, the dates may be volume-run metadata rather than printing dates. I have a feeling you're both referring to "Sestercecentennial flyover - Air Force" which was actually published in 2026 but the Google metadata says 1987. Proditonym (talk) 14:39, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

"Sestercentennial flyover*

Apologies Proditonym (talk) 14:45, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

Tarifit xeyyeq

Looks like an Arabic form-II verb of a root *خ ي ق (*ḵ y q). Could also be a form-V verb (which gets borrowed without the t-). Can't find anything in Arabic dictionaries, but the verb exists in another Berber language Kabyle as txeyyeq with the same meaning. lankdadank (chat) 17:45, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

blind tiger

[< the custom of exhibiting stuffed animals in speakeasies] Microsoft® Encarta® 2009. JMGN (talk) 00:41, 9 July 2026 (UTC)

Reconstruction:Proto-Germanic/þeuhabrōks

@Leasnam and anyone else interested (Notifying workgroup: Benwing2, Mnemosientje, The Editor's Apprentice, Hazarasp): Why does Gothic *𐌸𐌹𐌿𐌷𐌱𐍂𐍉𐌺𐍃 (*þiuhbrōks) have to be posited? Couldn't Late Latin tubrucus / tribuces / trabrugi be borrowed from Old High German diohbruoh? —Mahāgaja · talk 10:51, 9 July 2026 (UTC)

I believe it's due to the initial Latin t - ...wouldn't an original þ be required for this ? (compare troppus from *þorp) Leasnam (talk) 14:17, 9 July 2026 (UTC)

OK, but didn't some varieties of OHG still have /θ/? There are certainly OHG words spelled with th where PWG has *þ (e.g. thankōn. —Mahāgaja · talk 06:19, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

Yes, and Old High German could also be the source, though phonetically it seems more difficult in some ways, but still a real possibility. I've updated the etymology at trousers. Leasnam (talk) 08:52, 11 July 2026 (UTC)

momo (sense 1)

momo says the English word is a borrowing from Tibetan, but I think it's missing some steps. It seems more likely to be from the Nepali word मम, which was either borrowed from Tibetan or from Newar (which borrowed it from Tibetan). This is complicated by the Nepali word having a dozen alternate spellings. The entry for the Hindi word मोमो states the Nepali - Newar - Tibetan - Chinese chain.

Of course none of these etymologies are cited. The enwiki article w:Momo_(food)#Names has some citations but they're largely in Chinese and I can't tell if they're relevant. Apocheir (talk) 03:34, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

Firmware

Firm because the instructions will not be lost when power is shut off (Microsoft® Encarta® 2009). JMGN (talk) 08:05, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

Rather, I think, the point is that from the point of view of the application programmer this is indistinguishable from hardware, while from the point of view of the hardware designer this is software, so it occupies a level between soft and hard. Software can be run directly off a flash drive,^[1] which also retains the instructions without being powered.  ​‑‑Lambiam 12:10, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

Yiddish ־עניו (-enyu)

I have yet to find a satisfactory etymology for this suffix. The Belarusian-Yiddish dictionary says it's from Slavic, but provides no further elaboration. The idea that it's from the verbal noun suffix -enie / -enje is semantically incongruent as well. The closest thing I can think of is -енька (-enʹka) and an inflected form thereof, but wouldn't that be ־ענקו (-enku)? Another idea I had was this suffix I found in Pannonian Rusyn, -аня (-anja) which forms colloquial and sometimes derogatory forms of certain surnames, but that is still a far cry from a suffix of endearment.

And I find it hard to accept that the Yiddish speakers just "got confused". Several other suffixes of Slavic origin, like ־ניק (-nik), follow reasonably closely to their Slavic etymons. So I don't see how they could possibly conflate a verbal noun suffix with an endearment suffix, being attached to nouns and not verbs no less. Dijacz (talk) 09:29, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

After digging a little bit, I found a possible answer in Polish -unia, -unio + Yiddish -u (see język Żydów polskich by Ewa Geller) which is a diminutive suffix similar to what the Yiddish suffix is, said to be a fusion between the hypocoristic morpheme and the inflectional vocative morpheme. Xwefeld (talk) 10:07, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

Hadn't known of this suffix, and I do think we're close. But the deviation in the final vowel, I think, is simply that this is not from -unia, but from its etymon, -uń, whose vocative form is precisely -uniu. And it's absolutely within the realm of possibility that the two suffixes are synonymous in some Polish dialects.

As for anyone else reading this: the shift from -un- to -en- can be simply explained by the fact that the E in the Yiddish form is not [ɛ], but a schwa. If any vowel can reduce to a schwa in English, so it can in colloquial Polish. Dijacz (talk) 10:22, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

If indeed there are such Polish dialects, that solves it. But otherwise I wouldn't see much of a problem either, because the vocative of -unia is -unio, and that seems close enough by any measure. Thanks for answering a question that I'd also posed myself before! ~2026-38565-25 (talk) 00:07, 11 July 2026 (UTC)

PS: Or is it? Because at babunia it's actually given precisely as babuniu, which would decide it definitely. ~2026-38565-25 (talk) 00:09, 11 July 2026 (UTC)

Yeah, I could definitely see מאַמעניו (mamenyu) being a direct borrowing from mamuniu. Dijacz (talk) 00:13, 11 July 2026 (UTC)

For a direct borrowing the stress does not match. Compare also similar forms in Russian мама́ня (mamánja), which fit even better in terms of vowel quality but has the same issue with stress. I'm not sure we can really trace this suffix back to Polish specifically rather than from general Slavic, as Russian has the same unproductive suffix (папа́ня (papánja), тихо́ня (tixónja), бабу́ня (babúnja), деду́ня (dedúnja)), and I'm sure Ukrainian does as well. Thadh (talk) 05:36, 11 July 2026 (UTC)

Here's the thing though - as far as I can tell, neither Russian nor Ukrainian have a vocative singular form of this suffix in -unju, whereas Polish has -uniu from -unia, particularly in words like mamunia, babunia. And that's the difference to me, that's made me lock it down to be the Polish form of the suffix. Russian doesn't even have a uniform vocative case anymore, whereas in Ukrainian it's typically -unje or -uni for the vocative. Dijacz (talk) 09:14, 11 July 2026 (UTC)

gabacho, gavatx

Having noticed the Spanish entry for other reasons, I expanded the etymology a bit, but it seems like there are many theories as to its etymology:

• from a word for 'bird's crop', from Vulgar Latin *gaba "gullet", from a Gaulish word (presumably with a b- or w-ish second consonant rather than the -t- word below)?
• from a word for 'speak badly'?
• from a word for 'cheek', from Gaulish *gauta "cheek"?
• related to French gaber, from Old Norse?

and while some of these might ultimately be the same (e.g. I can see how 'speak badly' could possibly be semantically derived from gaber, or from a word for 'cheek'), the Spanish vs Catalan entries currently present different theories. Does anyone have other resources to bring to bear on this, to help with straightening the entries out? - -sche (discuss) 16:45, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

For etymologies concerning the Iberian peninsula, I highly recommend the DCECH by Coromines and Pascual, even if it has some reservations, it is nonetheless highly detailed and can give answers to questions like you're asking (btw his work has been online for a while here), especially in terms of collecting terms in Iberia it is an incredible work. So I'm giving you the answer he gives:

To start of, Coromines lists some cognates off in the Occitan region, to set up his proposal for later. It is also attested in Languedoc and Rabelais by guavasche in a secondary sense of "cowardly man". Other regions use the term gavach as "foreign person" (in Gers), "one who speaks a language badly" (in Bordeaux) and generally in the Occitan region, it is supposed to apply to the mountain people of the Tarn, the Aveyron and the Lozère.

He then continues rejecting earlier proposals that you haven't even mentioned, like the term coming from Latin gabalus or gabalitanus, but as he states, it doesn't match phonetically, so disregard this.

So to link it up with other similar terms and give a convincing etymology, he notes that the term gavach in Occitan has two other meanings, namely "bird's crop" and "goiter", due to these more northern people allegedly having more diseases and finds cognates in French gabot, jabot, Servigliano caaciu, Neapolitan gavattse, Piedmontese gavagun and Catalan gavaig.

Ultimately, he finds that all of these words share a common root, gava (more cognates being French gavion (“throat”), Old Occitan gavier (“goiter”) and Picard gave (“stomach”)) and to which he concludes a definitive pre-Roman origin for the word. He considers if it could be Celtic or not, due to the suffix -ach, but is unsure and leaves the origin open.

I haven't looked up Coromines' other work, his Catalan dictionary, which might have updates on the etymology, I will add on here, but consider this as a starter, I cannot say anything more about the validity of the other words without digging deeper. Xwefeld (talk) 17:43, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

After reviewing everything, I can tell you that the first three theories that you have mentioned come from Coromines and seem to have been badly conveyed onto your sources and onto the Catalan entry.

So the first option is the theory that Coromines has favoured, and which I've written on here already. The second theory is mentioned in passing by Coromines, for the meaning of a related word in the Bordeaux region as "one who speaks a language badly", it doesn't play much of role for the etymology of the word. The third option is Coromines comparing Occitan gauta, French joue and Catalan galta with gavatx and proposing it being from a substrate word *gau̯n̥-ta, similar to gau̯n̥-kte which he proposes gavach derives from. As for the final option, I haven't found anything mentioning gaber anywhere in relation to gavatx nor gabacho, so I would like to find where you have possibly seen this claim.

If nobody chimes in to reject what I've shared regarding the etymology of this word, I'll start to change the etymology to what Coromines has published in the DCECH and DEC, as it is the most up to date etymology for the word. Xwefeld (talk) 14:17, 11 July 2026 (UTC)

Thanks. - -sche (discuss) 22:39, 18 July 2026 (UTC)

Czech past tense verb surnames?

This is not to do with any one specific entry, but I've been wondering why there is such a weirdly large number of Czech surnames that are verbs conjugated in the masculine singular past tense. Like Dokoupil, Chytil and Coufal. Is there some sort of morphological innovation in Czech family names that are not present (or at least much less common) in other Slavic languages, barring Slovak? Or is it German influence somehow? Dijacz (talk) 11:20, 11 July 2026 (UTC)

The German site Namenforschung.net says something concerning these unique surnames: Die auf diese Weise gebildeten Familiennamen, die sich wahrscheinlich auf ein auffälliges Erlebnis oder Ereignis im Leben des ersten Namenträgers beziehen, stellen eine Besonderheit des Tschechischen dar, sind dort sehr häufig und vor allem in Mähren anzutreffen. Xwefeld (talk) 14:44, 11 July 2026 (UTC)

Spanish esposas

Apparently the same etymology, and not two separate ones? The RAE and Joan Corominas (I love this guy) seem to think so: the latter says La metáfora consistente en comparar las manillas a unas esposas es ya antigua (manillas = handcuffs?). I’m bringing it up here first, though, to see if anyone knows of dissenting voices or additional information for the Etymology section. — Polomo ⟨⁠ ⁠oi!⁠ ⁠⟩ · 03:50, 13 July 2026 (UTC)

-ician

According to it's etymology at the Random House Unabridged Dict. of AmE, it's "extracted" from musician, physician, etc., derived, with -ian, from words ending in -ic.

Accordingly, the Longman Pronunciation Dict., and the Cambridge Pronuncing English Dict., examplifies -ician with musician. JMGN (talk) 11:49, 13 July 2026 (UTC)

I think that -ician should not be considered a suffix on its own. We give the etymology of cosmetician as being from cosmetics +‎ -ician, but this is IMO clearly wrong; it should be cosmetic +‎ -ian. There are a few words, however, that end on -ician and do not straightforwardly fit the ...ic + -ian pattern: algebrician, beautician, mortician and scientician. The first of these can be explained as a blend of algebra +‎ mathematician. The second is explained as a blend of beauty +‎ technician. I do not find this particularly convincing; a blend of beauty +‎ esthetician is IMO a better fit. Others are not so readily explained as blends.  ​‑‑Lambiam 22:24, 13 July 2026 (UTC)

@Lambiam Similarly, both Longman and Cambridge pronunciation dicts. also state that -ageous appears in (dis)advantageous https://ell.stackexchange.com/questions/375380/suffix-ageous-as-in-advantageous/375386#375386 JMGN (talk) 22:45, 13 July 2026 (UTC)

Ragusa

Over the past few years the etymology has been changed ([2], [3]) from connecting the word to lausa and losanga, to deriving the word from Proto-Albanian *rāguša (modern rrush), to connecting the word to "Ancient Greek Ραγούσιον (Ragoúsion) or Ῥαούσιν (Rhaoúsin), of uncertain origin, but several ones have been propose", citing Beekes and (at Ragusia) removing mention of Albanian. Because I know Albanian etymologists have a tendency to claim everything that looks Albanian if you squint is native Albanian, and Beekes has a tendency to say anything that looks at him funny is pre-Greek or inexplicable, I want to ask for eyes on this, and ideally more sources: which theories are well-sourced and merit mention? - -sche (discuss) 16:18, 13 July 2026 (UTC)

The Albanian etymology has a respectable source (Orel + Çabej), so no reason to link it to crackpots. That doesn't mean it has to be correct, but then I'd like to see other referenced theories. Exarchus (talk) 09:19, 14 July 2026 (UTC)

Some interesting theories can be read in these papers: [4], [5]

It is very interesting to note the variant Labusedi, Labusa, which could support the original theory proposed by Constantine Porphyrogenitus that it comes from a Dalmatian word called "λαυ" meaning slope or some other word of Illyrian origin. But it could have also nothing to do with Ragusa and the word could have other origins. Xwefeld (talk) 10:05, 14 July 2026 (UTC)

I added two sources to Ragusia. It looks like Demiraj changed his mind from his opinion quoted by Beekes at ῥάξ. Exarchus (talk) 10:28, 14 July 2026 (UTC)

Thanks, all. - -sche (discuss) 22:39, 18 July 2026 (UTC)

multiple origins of Sarah?

Can anyone evaluate the correctness of diff, and the corresponding edit adding a new given-name line to سارة, where only the sense-line was reverted but the added etymology was left in place? Patrick Hanks, Dictionary of American Family Names (2003), page 270, suggests that the Arabic personal name has the same origin as the Hebrew personal name, rather than (as سارة#Etymology and Sarah currently still suggest) a different origin. - -sche (discuss) 23:07, 14 July 2026 (UTC)

Initially, I guess it would make sense for it being a name from the Bible, since in my impression, the early Arabic/ Muslim culture we know of seems to have been very inspired by concurrent Jewish and Christian culture. Wakuran (talk) 10:00, 15 July 2026 (UTC)

According to the Arabic Wikipedia, the events of Genesis 17 (God promising that Sarai/Sarah will bear a son to Abraham) are mentioned in the Qur’an without naming her, but “Muslim commentators have linked the woman mentioned in the verse to Sarah”. This is not sourced and there is no indication of what period these commentators are from.

According to the Arabic Wiktionary, the name سَارَة is not derived from any Arabic word, but rather is Arabicized.

سَارَة is the given name of, among others, Sara Abi Kanaan, Sara Ahmed, Sara Akbar and Sarah Akroun.  ​‑‑Lambiam 06:10, 18 July 2026 (UTC)

But that still doesn’t change the fact that native Arabic speakers experience the name as having an inherent meaning in their own language. Speaking from experience as a Bedouin from a north Arabian tribe, I heard my grandfather say to a female camel, “والله إنك سارة يا سارة”, where Sarah was used both as the well-known name(which was the name of the female camel) and as an adjective meaning “joyful.”

This is a complex phenomenon in Semitic linguistics. We can both agree that it is plausible that the name became widely popularized through the Quranic and Biblical traditions. However, both Arabic and Hebrew preserve the same root, even though their meanings have diverged over time, and both also share this specific morphological pattern.

We can confidently say that one of the earliest well-known attestations of the name appears in the Bible, but we cannot reliably exclude the possibility that the name existed independently in both languages or in an ancestral speech community. I think the better compromise is to explain that, in English and many other languages, the name Sarah is understood to derive from the Biblical account while also acknowledging the Arabic cognate and/or the meaning that the name carries in Arabic. What do you guys think? Rashed Aljahdali (talk) 21:24, 18 July 2026 (UTC)

Secondly, neither does Arabic Wikipedia or Arabic Wiktionary function as a reliable source within themselves in discussing etymology disputes in English Wiktionary. The matter right now is up to debate within this thread, and those two entries can change according, absent other refuting source. Rashed Aljahdali (talk) 21:38, 18 July 2026 (UTC)

But an experienced meaning doesn't have any bearing on its origin. Not having specific knowledge about the matter, I guess the main problem here is that pre-Islamic Arabic and its naming traditions are very poorly attested. Wakuran (talk) 21:43, 18 July 2026 (UTC)

Wakuran, first, thank you for rising that point. I think I can get my point through using reductio ad absurdum. Assuming, arguendo, that we grant the proposition that "Biblical/Quranic names and concepts that might have gotten Arabized, and lack former attested in a previous era constitute a borrowing instead of cognacy" we can introduce the analogous case of "مسيح" which comes from the root "م-س-ح" on the morphological pattern "فعيل" in this case the term is poorly attested in the pre-Christian Arabic era and does have the possibility of being borrowed from Hebrew/Aramaic, but main-stream scholarship agrees on the cognacy of the three terms, and now if we uphold the previously introduced proposition then it follows logically that the term is a mere borrowing, which contradict the main-stream scholarly view on this matter. Rashed Aljahdali (talk) 22:36, 18 July 2026 (UTC)

The point of the reductio is that a mere poor attestation can't bear the weight of a fully justified borrowing analysis. Rashed Aljahdali (talk) 22:53, 18 July 2026 (UTC)

Even assuming, arguendo, that the Arabic personal name was historically borrowed from Hebrew, that would not resolve every lexicographical issue. The form سارة is also an established Arabic adjective with its own lexical meaning and transparent morphology. Therefore, even if the etymology of the given name follows the biblical tradition, the entry should still acknowledge the Arabic lexical meaning where appropriate. Otherwise, the entry would omit a genuine fact about Arabic. Basically how do we reconcile this? Rashed Aljahdali (talk) 23:12, 18 July 2026 (UTC)

First of all, we need to demonstrate that the "joy" etymology isn't just an association in the minds of Arabic speakers, but that it has given rise to a separate word in Arabic that just happens to be spelled and pronounced the same. There are enough cases of folk etymologies being applied to the same term as conventional etymologies that we would need some kind of evidence that people have been given the one homophone and not the other. Then we have to demonstrate that this look-alike name has been used in English as a name where we can show that it also is this homophone and not the other. Chuck Entz (talk) 00:04, 19 July 2026 (UTC)

Thank you Chuck Entz for your response. You rise a big point that needs clarification here is the term from wiktionary that you can refer to Etymology 3 of سار (This entry was not authored by me) Rashed Aljahdali (talk) 00:22, 19 July 2026 (UTC)

You might say there is a difference between سارة and سَارّة because of the short vowel marks, but this is false. Arabic speakers rely on context to produce the short vowel, and in every case سارة is precisely rendered in speech as سَارّة. The same entry(was not authored by me) Links to the Sarah(name) which is rendered in Arabic with the redaction of the short vowel marks as سارة. Rashed Aljahdali (talk) 00:29, 19 July 2026 (UTC)

Your framing already assumes one of the very issues under dispute. By referring to it as a “look-alike name” or a “homophone,” the argument presupposes that we are dealing with two etymologically distinct lexical items that merely converge in spelling or pronunciation. In Arabic, سارة is not simply “associated” by folk etymology with an Arabic adjective. There is an independently attested Arabic lexical item derived from the native root and an attested morphological pattern that is well known in Arabic. Rashed Aljahdali (talk) 00:38, 19 July 2026 (UTC)

Sche, what do you think? Have you reached any conclusions? Rashed Aljahdali (talk) 00:23, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

own, owner, and owning

own says the verb is a back-formation from owner, owning, and the adjective, but owner says this word is derived from the verb + -er, and owning just says this is just a verb form.

Those etymologies seem circular and have to be revised. Davi6596 (talk) 23:38, 14 July 2026 (UTC)

Etymonline has this to say about the verb own: c. 1200, ounen, ahnen (“to possess, have; rule, be in command of, have authority over;”) from Old English geagnian, from root agan (“to have, to own”) (see owe), and in part from the adjective own (q.v.). It became obsolete after c. 1300, but was revived early 17c., in part as a back-formation of owner (mid-14c.), which continued. So the modern verb is a back-formation from owner, which comes from a Middle English word that really was ounen + -er. —Mahāgaja · talk 07:31, 15 July 2026 (UTC)

So owner should say the word comes from Middle English instead of being derived from a modern back-formed verb plus a suffix. Davi6596 (talk) 18:11, 15 July 2026 (UTC)

 Done. —Mahāgaja · talk 20:38, 15 July 2026 (UTC)

Which verb was used in early Early Modern English to express the meaning of “to own”?  ​‑‑Lambiam 06:22, 18 July 2026 (UTC)

have and owe (and obviously more literary/specialised terms such as possess). Hazarasp (parlement · werkis) 21:43, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

The semantic shift of "owe" from "properly/ permanently own" to "not properly/ temporarily own" is intriguing... Wakuran (talk) 22:44, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

So another, not slight, gap in our coverage, since this is the primary meaning of owe from the beginning to the end of Middle English and even in oft-read literature of the 17th century. I shy away from the embarrassment of wrapping the entry in a request for expansion. Fay Freak (talk) 23:12, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

Belarusian апанта́ны: which stage of Polish?

Hello! I’ve added an article Belarusian апанта́ны (apantány) (it's draft quality for now, I'll expand it like апанта́насць (apantánascʹ)), and I need help with Polish periodisation.

It's obvious that it’s from Polish opętany, but which Polish? Middle Polish? Old Polish? HSBM doesn’t have dates when it was attested in Old/Middle Belarusian, so I don't know which version of Polish to put.

I've put Middle Polish for now but I don't know if this is correct. Хтосьці (talk) 09:18, 16 July 2026 (UTC)

opętany is attested since the 16th century (apparently the earliest), so Middle Polish is possible. At that time, the nasal would still be realized with a front low-mid vowel, so I'm not sure how that factors into the Belarusian phonetic adaption. How are modern words with nasals borrowed? Vininn126 (talk) 09:31, 16 July 2026 (UTC)

I wonder if there might bave been a semantic influence from German besessen, as that also could mean both "obsessed" and "possessed" and German traditionally has had a strong influence on various Slavic languages, including Polish. But there might be another explanation. Wakuran (talk) 10:02, 16 July 2026 (UTC)

Hard to find modern borrowings with nasals! The only one I can think of is ужо́нд (užónd) < urząd (e.g. [6]), widely used among emigrants.

Honestly, I think usually people follow the established transcription — which usually means doing whatever Russian is doing, and just replacing ри, рь (ri, rʹ) with ры, р (ry, r) and so on. So, ą becomes -он-, -ом-, ę becomes -эн-, -эм- (Russian writes -ен-, -ем-, but Е here is an orthographic convention, representing underlying non-iotated sound; Belarusian writes Э in such cases, same as in кафе́ (kafé) — кафэ́ (kafé)).

If opętany were borrowed right now, today, it would become *апэнта́ны (*apentány) — but unstressed «э» is generally restricted to foreign words, and it becomes «а» once the word is no longer considered foreign (compare адука́цыя (adukácyja) < edukacja, лі́тара (lítara) < litera) so апанта́ны (apantány) is the expected form. Хтосьці (talk) 10:18, 16 July 2026 (UTC)

Polish nasals in many dialects have had a tendency to lower to aN, notably a few Masovian dialects (bordering Lithuania, Belarus), however I do not believe the Northern Borderlands dialect does this. Vininn126 (talk) 10:24, 16 July 2026 (UTC)

This it probably just akańnie in Belarusian. Хтосьці (talk) 10:37, 16 July 2026 (UTC)

That would make sense. I'm not sure we can get much from the periodization, the term seems semnatically stable. I'm also not sure when the period of loans were strongest. Vininn126 (talk) 11:05, 16 July 2026 (UTC)

Pannonian Rusyn Гербут (Herbut)

A Rusyn surname. I traced it back to Old Slovak Harbut, but that's as far as I got. It also seems like Polish has Herbut as well, but no further leads. Any suggestions? Dijacz (talk) 22:50, 16 July 2026 (UTC)

This should be from some Middle High German or Old High German form of Herbert. Xwefeld (talk) 16:29, 18 July 2026 (UTC)

See here, under Герба. Vahag (talk) 16:33, 18 July 2026 (UTC)

Yiddish כליאַניען (khlyanyen)

Any ideas? I wrote down my speculated idea in the Etymology section in the entry itself, but as I mention there, it's semantically challenging. Dijacz (talk) 16:56, 17 July 2026 (UTC)

Never mind, I solved it. Ukrainian хлянути (xljanuty). Dijacz (talk) 16:59, 17 July 2026 (UTC)

Where did the word "exophthalmos" come from?

Got any ideas where this word came from? Angrythewikipedian (talk) 11:52, 18 July 2026 (UTC)

It's exo- + ophthalmos, but the two o's blended together. Wakuran (talk) 16:01, 18 July 2026 (UTC)

acculturation

Why ad- instead of the intermediate ac-? JMGN (talk) 20:45, 18 July 2026 (UTC)

Because in derivation templates we are undecided whether the type level or token level of an affix is exposed. We say ac- is an alternative form of ad- but more properly it is, as an assimilation of a basic form, subordinate to it.

Then again in categories it is another question. In vowel harmony languages at least it appears to have been compelling to pick one, see Category:Turkish terms suffixed with -li, so the categories like Category:Turkish terms by suffix do not look like madness. We might learn the same for consonant assimilations from some polysynthetic languages. Fay Freak (talk) 00:38, 19 July 2026 (UTC)

See also Category:Turkish terms suffixed with -dir, which covers the forms -dır, -dir, -dur, -dür, -tır, -tir, -tur and -tür, thus accommodating not only vowel harmony but also progressive assimilation.  ​‑‑Lambiam 18:14, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

Ouseburn

Our etymology seems to be concerned only with the first part of the word, and takes it to be different from Ouse. Is that right? And is the second part of the word just burn ("stream")? - -sche (discuss) 22:38, 18 July 2026 (UTC)

katundu

hello, i do not use wiki-anything often so i apologise if the formatting of this message is odd or if i’m simply in the wrong place. I believe the IPA for katundu is incorrect ( /kaˈtú.ⁿdu/), but I’m not familiar enough to correct it. The pronunciation i and all the people i’ve asked about this have known for my entire life is “cuh-to͝o-n-doo” or “kah toen do”, while i believe the IPA listed is pronounced like “cat-n-doo”. just thought i’d point this out just in case. sorry if i’m just being a bother… thank you! Owiebuggie (talk) 06:11, 19 July 2026 (UTC)

upon further thought, there’s a chance the chichewa and tumbuka pronunciations are different, given the cat-n-doo pronunciation seems like it would be true for chichewa, and the version i know is tumbuka, but i don’t even know where i’d start with that… Owiebuggie (talk) 06:14, 19 July 2026 (UTC)

nhão

Compare Thai เหนียว Yonngoukann (talk) 17:13, 19 July 2026 (UTC)

cost-push (inflation)

What (financial/economic) meaning of push is used here? Compare demand-pull (inflation). JMGN (talk) 18:37, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

"At first glance it would not appear difficult to distinguish between cases of inflation which are due respectively to the push of wage increases and to the pull of demand. It seems reasonable to infer that if an inflationary situation is characterized by a buyers' market, prices are being pushed up faster than demand will permit" (Holzman 1960, 21; original emphasis).

Holzman, Franklyn D. 1960 March. 'Inflation: Cost-Push and Demand-Pull.' The American Economic Review 50(1), 20-42.

Cnilep (talk) 03:19, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

Should we add a new entry into zh-pron where we can add in an Early Mandarin section under Mandarin?

The Early Mandarin entries will be based off of (1991 Pulleyblank), specifically "LEXICON OF RECONSTRUCTED PRONUNCIATION in Early Middle Chinese, Late Middle Chinese, and Early Mandarin"

In fact, I have already edited my own code from within the Module:sandbox/zh-pron. I tested the code out, and sure enough, it works well.

All you have to do is to set the parameter of "m-ear" = "y" and that is it.

Compare my edits and the winger bot differences. Blahhmosh (talk) 19:11, 20 July 2026 (UTC)

Akkadian 𒄀 (qanû) from Sumerian 𒄀 (gi)

Diff removed the Sumerian ety from canal, but it's still present on 𒄀#Akkadian. If it's right, it should be restored to canal; if it's wrong, it should also be removed from the Akkadian entry. - -sche (discuss) 02:34, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

It appears to be a borrowing of the glyph (with its semantic meaning), rather than the word itself, I guess. Wakuran (talk) 10:32, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

Exactly. Some IPs do think when we don’t. The abstraction of course constantly challenges the mind if one works with language materials of heterogrammatic scripts. And the entry canal does not link the Akkadian entry either but the sign still (since before we decided to lemmatize Akkadian at Latin-script transcriptions while still having cuneiform entries). Fay Freak (talk) 00:38, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

tomato girl (summer)

As far as I can tell, both tomato girl and tomato girl summer emerged as part of a social media microtrend around June 2023. The latter entry says it is a compound of the former plus summer, but it seems to me that two possibilities are equally likely.

1. The phrase tomato girl summer was coined by analogy to hot girl summer, with the first part later split from it (perhaps to sell goods less evocative of "summer").
2. The phrase tomato girl was coined by analogy to VSCO girl, clean girl, and the like, and later compounded with summer.

I don't have any evidence that either of these is definitively correct, though. Cnilep (talk) 03:02, 21 July 2026 (UTC)

value-free

Because not affected by or based on value judgments? JMGN (talk) 20:28, 22 July 2026 (UTC)

The term value-free is actually a back-formation from value-freedom, a calque of Wertfreiheit, which should more properly have been named Werturteilsfreiheit.^[7]  ​‑‑Lambiam 14:36, 23 July 2026 (UTC)

Wilbur Urban uses the English value-free in a 1916 article, which the OED gives as its earliest example. (Value-freedom appears in English from the 1950s, FWIW.)

I am willing for the sake of argument to admit the purely factual, value-free character of 'tendency.' But that still does not save the definition from being circular. For to say that the furthering of a tendency is to that tendency a good is to imply that furthering or fulfilment is in itself a good, and why after all should it be so?

(Urban, Wilbur. 1916. "Value and existence." The Journal of Philosophy, Psychology and Scientific Methods 13, page 454.)

Weber seems to have published work on Wertfreiheit around the same time (e.g. "Der Sinn der 'Wertfreiheit' der ökonomischen und soziologischen Wissenschaften" 1917). Urban cites a fair few German philosophers in footnotes (but not Weber, as far as I noticed), suggesting that he may have calqued the German, but I've already said more than I know with any certainty. Cnilep (talk) 03:47, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

֭Urban’s article discusses definitions of the term value as given by philosophers, noting the circularities in several of these. In the quoted passage, he is referring to a definition by Wilmon Henry Sheldon, viz. of value as fulfilment of any tendency whatsoever. Since the notion of “tendency” is purely factual, this definition of “value” appears to avoid the circularity. Urban argues that, nevertheless, there is an implicit circularity, in that it assumes the value relation of fulfilment being “better than” non-fulfilment.

Be this as it may. it appears that, in the context, the nonce term value-free, applied to a definition, means, “not depending, explicitly or implicitly, on a notion of ‘value’”. In the context of the argument, the attribute is a transparent shorthand for “independent of a notion of ‘value’”, which is another sense than the sociological freedom of value judgements.  ​‑‑Lambiam 18:02, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

Pannonian Rusyn Цап (Cap)

Another Rusyn surname. Could it be related to цап (cap, “he-goat”) somehow? Edit: I've found that Slovak Cap exists as well, especially in eastern Slovakia. The question still remains. Dijacz (talk) 10:54, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

Hmm, well, then we would have an analogy in English Buck and related Germanic surnames. Wakuran (talk) 11:13, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

Category:Indonesian terms borrowed from Old Galician-Portuguese

Both of the following Indonesian etymologies show a direct borrowing from "Old Galician-Portuguese" to Indonesian. Setting aside the distinction between Indonesian and Classical Malay- which I know Indonesian editors would prefer to ignore- I still think this is chronologically impossible. As far as I'm aware, the first contacts between people of Galicia or Portugal and Indonesians was after Old Galician-Portuguese had evolved into Galician and Portuguese, and specifically involved speakers of Portuguese.

There was no direct oceanic route from Europe to Indonesia until Portuguese explorers showed it was possible to reach South Asia by going around the southern tip of Africa. The presence in Madagascar of languages related to those of Borneo does show that contact between eastern Africa and Indonesia was certainly possible, but travel through the Mediterranean and across to the Red Sea wouldn't have been very easy for those on the Atlantic coast. Chuck Entz (talk) 03:40, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

ordi

From Old Galician-Portuguese ordin, from Latin ordo. Doublet of rodi, orde, order, ordo, and wardi.

rodi

From earlier ordi, from Old Galician-Portuguese ordin, from Latin ordo. Doublet of orde, order, ordi, and ordo.

Indonesian/Malay "wajar" etymology

Hello, Is Indonesian/Malay wajar ("proper, normal, ordinary") a Sanskrit loanword? Please Yuliadhi (talk) 06:55, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

Nazi theories about قر#Persian and غنج#Arabic

Are there other sources supporting the theories we currently source to Davud Monshizadeh/Monši-Zâde? I suppose being a Nazi and member of the SS who groomed himself to look like his idol Adolf Hitler doesn't necessarily mean his etymological ideas are also fringe — though nationalists do seem to often have nonstandard ideas about etymology, thinking that words that other people consider to be from other languages [e.g. Arabic] are in fact from the nationalist's preferred [in this case: Iranian] language(s), which is ... exactly what he is doing in these two entries — but I notice that in both entries his ideas are presented in secondary paragraphs after the apparently mainstream(?) etymology, so I wonder how widely held or credible his theories about those words are: If only he holds those ideas, are they worth mentioning? Or if others also back those theories, would it make sense to cite those others instead? - -sche (discuss) 17:07, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

Why do you think there are so many to cite about Arabic etymology? I am glad enough I even found two different etymologies, which is the result of systematically harvesting both books for anything I dig. Monchi-Zadeh is king, as the anti-Semite Paul de Lagarde was king, but less so in Arabic, yet still Team Corriente actually regularly invents even stranger and slipperier derivations, but I agreed with Corriente et al. 2017 more in principle, with the reasoning being the root structure (homorganic first and third radical) per the statistic distribution outlined in {{R:sem-pro:Greenberg:1950|page=162}}, {{R:sem-pro:Vernet i Pons:2011|page=4}}, that would have led me to such a surmise independently. Of course it is not inherited from Proto-Semitic so there are only these two options of it having been formed anew from other elements (and this is always nonstandard grammar) or borrowed. Fay Freak (talk) 18:21, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

scantle

The 2 verbs have got to be the same. The noun shouldn't though ~2026-39392-05 (talk) 18:28, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

1913 Webster considers them to have different etymologies, although some conflation occurred. [8] Wakuran (talk) 00:47, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

mawn "ghost"

mawn "ghost": what's the etymology? - -sche (discuss) 21:41, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

It might have some connection to Latin mānēs, I suppose. Chuck Entz (talk) 23:38, 25 July 2026 (UTC)

Boston Tea Party

tea party is not being used here, is it? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_Tea_Party#History JMGN (talk) 09:27, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

It's an ironic reference, obviously. Wakuran (talk) 11:06, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

lesser spotted

I wrote in the etymology section that "The popular idea that 'lesser spotted' means 'seen (spotted) less often' is a misunderstanding of the origin of the phrase (or a play on words)." However, I'm wondering now whether this punning interpretation was (at least part of) the reason why the phrase came to mean what it means. If so, the ety would need to be adjusted. What do you think? Mihia (talk) 21:22, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

It is a humorous {{rebracketing}}. Fay Freak (talk) 02:36, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

I don’t think it is a rebracketing. In either sense, it is the spotting that is less intense. Both in the zoological names and the humourous uses, you can use a hyphen: the lesser-spotted pinion; the lesser-spotted Max Verstappen mistake.  ​‑‑Lambiam 07:57, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

I'm reminded of the "spotted or herbaceous backson" from The House at Pooh Corner. I wouldn't overthink it. —Mahāgaja · talk 06:26, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

There is even a book by the title Lesser Spotted Animals. While some people may have occasionally thought that, for example, the lesser spotted fritillary meant, literally, “the fritillary, which is rarely sighted”, I suppose that in most cases people just spotted the ambiguity and the opportunity it offered for humourous application, just like the ambiguity in "a pair of great tits” is readily noticed, and not only by pubescent schoolboys.  ​‑‑Lambiam 12:13, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

Indeed, the ornithologists in the song that I can't fully remember not only "liked birds", geddit, but were "thrilled to bits when we see a pair of tits". Mihia (talk) 13:51, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the replies. However, the specific question is whether the alternative interpretation was part of the original reason or motivation for this usage of the phrase, or whether it only followed later, either as a deliberate pun or a misunderstanding of the etymology. I've always kind of assumed the latter, but now I'm wondering whether this is actually correct. Mihia (talk) 10:56, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

For what it's worth as an anecdatum, I didn't realize this could be interpreted as "[spotted=seen] [less often]" until this discussion. (I know you can speak of "lesser known" things, but it seems to be uncommon(?)—though I now see, searching Google Books, not unheard of—to speak of e.g. "lesser realized" things.) So, if I had been coining the term, I would only have considered that it's a wordy phrase that occurs in the names of many relatively obscure species (humans commonly interact with "dogs", "rabbits", "cows", "bees", "frogs", etc; "lesser spotted" species are obscurer) and thus conveys "this is a species, and not one of the ones humans commonly think about". But perhaps the people who coined it are wittier than I am! - -sche (discuss) 16:49, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

You're not alone. Even though it might seem "obvious", it's only very recently that I became aware of this alternative punning interpretation (or for some people, I think, complete misunderstanding) of the phrase. It kind of reminds me of polite notice which has weirdly developed a new life and is (where I live) now freely used in a new sense by people with apparently no understanding of what it originally meant. Mihia (talk) 17:13, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

Serbo-Croatian carina

Is it car +‎ -ina or car +‎ -arina? Given that -arina has the specific sense of denoting a tax or fee, unlike -ina. Dijacz (talk) 13:40, 28 July 2026 (UTC)

Possibility 3: what if this is where the -arina suffix comes from? A rebracketing of sorts. Extracting the "fee" sense from carina, and then applying this -arina suffix to use elsewhere, like in školarina. Dijacz (talk) 13:51, 28 July 2026 (UTC)

fair exchange is no robbery

Does it not come from fair exchange (a deal or trade at a price that the buyer and the seller are both happy with)? JMGN (talk) 21:26, 28 July 2026 (UTC)

The collocation fair exchange is a transparent sum of parts; it means, an exchange that is fair, just like red radish means, a radish that is red.  ​‑‑Lambiam 17:05, 30 July 2026 (UTC)

saiga

This is a word for a kind of antelope. The word's ultimate ancestor, Reconstruction:Proto-Turkic/saygak, was also a word for that kind of antelope. But the entry saiga says it reached English via Russian сайга́ (sajgá) (also a word for that antelope) "from Chagatai سایغاق (saiɣak, a kind of chamois)". This seems noto-so-plausible, that the intermediate stage(s) between Proto-Turkic and Russian would stop meaning antelope but the original meaning would still come through. Reconstruction:Proto-Turkic/saygak suggests the word instead went from Proto-Turkic through Kipchak and Kazakh words meaning the antelope into Russian; this seems more plausible. Should saiga be changed to match the derivation path given in Reconstruction:Proto-Turkic/saygak? - -sche (discuss) 16:58, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

Changed. - -sche (discuss) 17:08, 1 August 2026 (UTC)

learned borrowing

GAH I meant to type "aloud" when reverting my edit my bad

> sorry, seems I was wrong on this! never heard it said allowed, thought learnèd was just a weird way to say it but mb it's convention

oh, guess there isn't a built-in option for quoting someone like on Reddit JoJawesome2 (talk) 22:27, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

I don't know this term, but I don't see how the pronunciation can be either /ˌlɜːnɪd/ or /ˌlɜːnd/ as presently stated. Those would mean completely different things. Only one can be correct, surely. Mihia (talk) 23:42, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

For the verb form learned, the past participle of the verb to learn, we recognize only one-syllable pronounciations. But we recognize both two-syllable and one-syllable pronunciations for the adjective. This carries over to learned borrowing, in which the first word is an adjective.  ​‑‑Lambiam 16:59, 30 July 2026 (UTC)

I am well aware that there are one- and two-syllable pronunciations of the word "learned". My point is that the meaning would be different, depending on the choice. "learnèd borrowing" would mean something quite different from "learnd borrowing". So which meaning is it in the phrase "learned borrowing"? How can it be both? Mihia (talk) 17:18, 30 July 2026 (UTC)

Either way pronounced, the expression learned borrowing means the same: a borrowing introduced by a learned (erudite) person.  ​‑‑Lambiam 06:45, 1 August 2026 (UTC)

"learned person", meaning "erudite person", cannot be pronounced either way -- it has to be "learnèd". The two dictionaries that I can find that list "learned borrowing" in our sense, more or less, both have the pronunciation as "learnèd" [9][10]. Also, we have an actual entry learnèd borrowing with quotations showing it written that way, fairly obviously to clarify that it is not "learnd". I think the "learnd" pronunciation is most probably wrong (for this entry, for the phrase that is intended and the meaning as defined) and should be removed. If "learnd borrowing" does exist separately as a dictionary-worthy phrase then it needs a separate definition. Mihia (talk) 09:38, 1 August 2026 (UTC)

I would think otherwise, that the "learnid" pronunciation is wrong, as it refers to knowledge having been learnt. (Disregarding that the erudite meaning might be pronounced in both ways.) Then, I'm not a native speaker. Wakuran (talk) 11:33, 1 August 2026 (UTC)

I'm not a native speaker either, but a "learned borrowing" is an "academic" or "scholarly" borrowing. So obviously the disyllabic pronunciation is the expected and regular one. Considering it "wrong" makes no sense. It might be that the monosyllabic form is also possible, but this would be a matter of usage. Logically speaking, only the disyllabic form is justified. (In the same way, we say in German, which I think you have some knowledge of, "gelehrte Entlehnung", not **"gelernte Entlehnung".) ~2026-42252-45 (talk) 23:13, 1 August 2026 (UTC)

Wiktionary is descriptive: we attempt to record the actual way words are used, and not the “officially correct“ way. If the pronunciation learn'd borrowing is not actually used, we should correct the Pronunciation section. Otherwise, since there are significant sources proclaiming that the two-syllable pronunciation for learned in the sense of “erudite” is the one and only true one, we may add a usage note to the effect that the learn'd pronunciation is sometimes proscribed.  ​‑‑Lambiam 20:14, 2 August 2026 (UTC)

We can be descriptive up to the point of blatant errors. If "learnd borrowing" is simply an incorrect guess by someone who doesn't understand the phrase, thereby changing the intended meaning entirely, then "sometimes proscribed" is too weak. We should be helping our readers, not implying that blatant errors, if that's what it is, might "sometimes" be acceptable. Mihia (talk) 20:24, 2 August 2026 (UTC)

@Lambian Isn't that exactly what I said?? I quote myself: "It might be that the monosyllabic form is also possible, but this would be a matter of usage." -- Descriptivism means to have oneself guided by actual usage; it doesn't mean that you can't appreciate the fact that a certain usage may be illogical. If, say, some language said "three days" to mean "a week", that would be fine if it's accepted usage, but it would still be illogical. ~2026-42252-45 (talk) 09:53, 3 August 2026 (UTC)

teed off

Alteration of peed off? JMGN (talk) 20:37, 30 July 2026 (UTC)

Both piss off -> P off and tick off -> T off feel like quite natural developments by themselves. Wakuran (talk) 11:32, 31 July 2026 (UTC)

Vietnamese rau bina

Definitely comes from épinard, but why is the "é" dropped? Mejustbeinghere (talk) 03:07, 31 July 2026 (UTC)

Possibly, four syllables might have felt too much, if there was no other vegetable to mix it up with. Wakuran (talk) 11:36, 31 July 2026 (UTC)

Cartoon catchphrases origins

There are absolutely many known famous cartoon catchphrases and I know some possibly origins to it!

• What’s up, doc isn’t really popularized by Bugs Bunny it could be something in actions, events or that happened before historically, I mean also it’s means a insult or darker meanings, I found out in Be amazed video (I don’t know the real title is and I forgot it)

• I tawt a taw a puddy tat is totally a resembles a pronunciation to “I taught a caught a pussy cat” or “I taught a saw a pussy cat?, maybe the catchphrases is too very mispronunciationing or misheard, but that’s the actually meaning

• Sufferin’ Succotash is probably a nonsense catchphrase, but It has also some meanings like sufferin’ could be suffering or surfering, I think Slyvester the Cat supposely to say Suffering Suck a tash?, maybe

• You’re despicable by Daffy Duck could be just means You’re unpredictable or hate something better than you? that’s probably the true origin right?

• Woohoo! is a interjection expression maybe related to “whoopee!” or “yipee” or maybe something that similars to that joyful exclamations there?

• Pepe le Pew’s catchphrases like “Oh, my little darling It is love at first sight” and other phrases with le beginning on it, with mocking French accent is actually a spoof of Charles Boyer’s similar quotes or Maurice Chevalier’s similar French sayings in the 1940s movies?

• Foghorn Leghorn’s “It’s a joke son!” is actually taken from that 1940s movie maybe Kenny Dalmer coined it?

• Elmer Fudd saying “wabbit” most in classic cartoons is probably the true rabbit classification of Bugs Bunny, because wabbit usually refers to “any cartoon rabbits that have toon force”, not the r pronounciation?

what do you think?, do you agree with this? TheOneWhoaddssomething (talk) 14:39, 31 July 2026 (UTC)

That "toon force" description is naturally derived from Elmer Fudd's pronunciation, not the other way around. Wakuran (talk) 17:54, 31 July 2026 (UTC)

Just so you don't think this is being ignored, I thought I'd reply. Most of these are ordinary words or phrases that just happen to have become associated with Looney Tunes because the iconic characters repeat them. Most either aren't catchphrases or probably didn't originate with Looney Tunes. The meanings are generally transparent, which is why most of them wouldn't need entries in Wiktionary. But as for individual phrases:

• "What's up, Doc?" is just a standard greeting, with "Doc" being a generic name for a person of unknown name, just like "Mac" or "Bub" were once used. While it's strongly associated with Bugs Bunny, it didn't originate with Looney Tunes. If there are any "darker" meanings, they're context-specific, and not an inherent meaning of the phrase.

• In "I tawt a taw a puddy tat", "tawt" means "thought" and "taw" clearly means "saw", in the child-like speech of Tweety Bird; that's why he says it when he sees Sylvester. Childlike speech or speech impediments were a mainstay of Looney Tunes characters: besides Tweety, Sylvester and Daffy Duck have pronounced lisps, and Elmer Fudd can't pronounce 'r'. But there's no deeper meaning: it's just one character's childlike pronunciation that happened to become his catchphrase.

• "Sufferin' Succotash!" is a minced oath; that is, a mild, nonsensical phrase used in place of strong language. It probably derives from "suffering saviour", a genuine oath that would have offended very religious persons, and been considered inappropriate for children to hear. The alliteration also serves to make it sillier and less threatening, as does Sylvester's pronounced lisp when he says it. Succotash doesn't have a deeper meaning; it's a dish made with corn and beans.

• "Despicable" means "worthy of being despised", i.e. hated, or regarded with disdain. As with Sylvester, the fact that Daffy has a pronounced lisp that keeps him from saying his catchphrase smoothly is what makes it memorable.

• "Woo-hoo" (various spellings) is simply an exclamation of delight, and I don't think it's especially associated with Looney Tunes, although it doubtless appears in various shorts.

• It's no secret that Pepé le Pew's voice and mannerisms are based on stereotypes of French actors, and Charles Boyer in particular, for his portrayal of Pépé le Moko. But the only part of the particular sentence you mention that would require any definition is "love at first sight", which even without looking, I'm certain is already defined on Wiktionary—but it's not particularly associated with Pepé le Pew.

• I don't think that Foghorn Leghorn's catchphrases require any definition; their meaning is completely transparent.

• As previously mentioned, Elmer Fudd's inability to pronounce 'r' is just a detail added to make him sound funny; it doesn't have any deeper meaning.

Most of this could be found by anyone looking up the characters or words on Wikipedia or in Wiktionary. But there's no controversy or debate about their etymology or meaning, so there's not much to do here. P Aculeius (talk) 01:13, 3 August 2026 (UTC)

I would add that Foghorn Leghorn has an accent characteristic of an older Southern gentleman. I'm sure he would adress any male as "Son". He comes across as rather straight-laced and liking to hear himself talk. The joke is that he's so straight-laced no one can tell when he's trying to be funny.

As for Bugs Bunny: I get the impression that he talks like a street kid of that era- urban and slangy enough to get on the nerves of a rural stuffed shirt like Elmer Fudd.

As for "suffering succotash" and "you're despicable": I think those were carefully chosen to emphasize the speech peculiarities of the characters. It wouldn't surprise me if the writers took some other minced oath and replaced the second part with a word that sounds silly enough without the sibilance- the fact that the first syllable sounds like "suck" doesn't hurt, though they would never admit that to the censors- but that starts with an "s" and ends with an "sh". I would note that both both have a first syllable followed by a second syllable with at least close to the same vowel- sort of an internal rhyme: suffering succotash and despicable (in the second the "e" is a schwa that sounds a lot like the lax short "i"). Chuck Entz (talk) 03:18, 3 August 2026 (UTC)

A resemblance to "suck" as a vulgarity seems anachronistic; the quotations we have for it date from the late 60's onward, and I don't remember it in older works, though that could be selective memory or just Hollywood self-censorship. A better case might be made for its resemblance to "sucker", meaning a fool, rube, or dupe, which apparently dates from the 18th century, and seems to have lost most of its sense of vulgarity by the time of Looney Tunes. I don't know, I always thought it might be vulgar, but it was openly used in material of this kind, so there might not have been any need to mince it. The article about Sylvester on Wikipedia specifically cites "suffering saviour", though I have to admit I didn't know that one, and was prepared to guess that it wasn't based on any specific oath before I checked. I thought perhaps it was deliberate nonsense. P Aculeius (talk) 05:11, 3 August 2026 (UTC)

I would guess the modern negative connotations of "suck" are homophobic in origin, while the older term "sucker" would relate to a naive baby still suckling the mother's breast. Wakuran (talk) 10:02, 3 August 2026 (UTC)

That's possible, but it still seems unlikely that the writers of Looney Tunes had either of those meanings in mind, or that Sylvester would have been allowed to say it repeatedly across the years if audiences were likely to draw such a connection. And the use of "suck" to refer to something unpleasant or poor still seems anachronistic; it doesn't seem to have been part of the vernacular as early as the 1940's, when Sylvester debuted. P Aculeius (talk) 14:08, 3 August 2026 (UTC)

stormcock

Because it sings even in bad weather? JMGN (talk) 17:30, 31 July 2026 (UTC)

One of the first to be heard is the Missel Thrush or Stormcock (Turdus viscivorus), which often begins to sing at the end of January or beginning of February; and may sometimes be heard while it is blowing and raining, whence the derivation of one of its names; the other name was given from its fondness for the berries of the mistletoe.^[11]

 ​‑‑Lambiam 06:31, 1 August 2026 (UTC)

@Lambiam Another one: So called because it was believed to give forewarning of bad weather (18th century) https://www.wordreference.com/definition/storm-cock JMGN (talk) 09:00, 1 August 2026 (UTC)

Here is a poetic rendering of the bird’s reputation:

Like an “ enchanter calling up the gale, ”
    Through storm and sleet he sings, erect and fearless.^[12]

The poem does not mention the name stormcock, which IMO strengthens the plausibility that the etymology is not mere folk etymology, at least for Turdus viscivorus. This and the other citations do not apply to Picus viridis.  ​‑‑Lambiam 12:10, 1 August 2026 (UTC)

August 2026

Gulf States

It comes from Gulf + state, right? Instead of Gulf + States, and thus there is no Gulf State. JMGN (talk) 12:16, 1 August 2026 (UTC)

According to Wikipedia's List of U.S. state and territory nicknames, Gulf State is a nickname of Florida. (I think this is always used with a definite article: the Gulf State.)

I am not convinced that Gulf States is a proper noun. I see it as an alternative way of spelling Gulf states, the plural of the common noun Gulf state (as in, “Iraq is a Gulf state heavily dependent on the Strait of Hormuz for the overwhelming bulk of its trade with the outside world.”^[13] or, for the US, “Alabama.—This Gulf state is now the only coastwise commonwealth that has not adopted the Model Law.”^[14]).

This common noun is found in the singular too with an unwarranted capitalization (“Iraq is a Gulf State : we must remember that.”^[15]; “Formed as a Territory, in 1817, from the eastern part of Mississippi Territory, this Gulf State of the United States is bounded on the north by Tennessee, 150 miles; ...”^[16]).  ​‑‑Lambiam 09:53, 2 August 2026 (UTC)

Proto-Germanic *armaz, Proto-Slavic *ormo, Latin armus, Sanskrit ईर्म (īrma) etc.

As ancestor of the above terms, we currently give *h₂erH-mo-s ~ *h₂r̥H-mó-s (“arm”) on the PIE page *h₂er-. But as the latter root doesn't end in a laryngeal, those terms should get their separate PIE reconstruction page, the question is simply what kind of stem to reconstruct. Kroonen (at *arma- 1) gives an old m-stem with nom. *h₂érh₂-m, gen. *h₂rh₂-m-és (I'm not sure where Kroonen gets the second *h₂ instead of *H). That does strike me as a bit speculative, have other *m-stems like this been proposed? (I know there's *ǵʰéyōm) Exarchus (talk) 20:37, 1 August 2026 (UTC)

Manx Grammeydys

Grammeydys in Manx is actually came from or possibly borrowed from English grammar with an gaelic root? and it’s plural is grammeydyn, why isn’t sourceful though?, can I add it to the entry pls? TheOneWhoaddssomething (talk) 08:21, 2 August 2026 (UTC)

In my impression, the -d- would indicate an influence more directly from Latin grammatica, although I'm not an expert in Celtic languages. Wakuran (talk) 09:41, 2 August 2026 (UTC)

pocket veto

According to Microsoft Encarta (2009), from the idea of the executive's holding the bill in a coat pocket. JMGN (talk) 11:56, 2 August 2026 (UTC)

As I've heard it from long before 2009. DCDuring (talk) 17:57, 2 August 2026 (UTC)

Pannonian Rusyn нина (nina)

Means "aunt". It exists also in Macedonian, so I'd assume it's some sort of regional South Slavic term that was borrowed into Pannonian Rusyn. What else beyond that though? Dijacz (talk) 04:26, 3 August 2026 (UTC)

Aren't there a lot of similar reduplicated words for family relationships around the world, such as nonno and nan? Wakuran (talk) 12:40, 3 August 2026 (UTC)

Vasmer, ESUM and ESBM link Bulgarian неня (nenja, “mother's sister”), which is probably related to Macedonian, to Belarusian няня (njanja, “nanny”), Russian няня (njanja, “nanny”), Ukrainian няня (njanja, “nanny”), whence also Ukrainian неня (nenja, “mother”) and a lot of words in other Slavic languages. And they link it to children's speech, like Wakuran says. Хтосьці (talk) 21:33, 3 August 2026 (UTC)

Probably ultimately Proto-Slavic. Vininn126 (talk) 21:38, 3 August 2026 (UTC)

Okay, so I probably should've searched a little more before asking, but FWIW, I found нина (nyna) in a Carpathian Rusyn dictionary, which also lists неня (nenja) as a variation thereof. Maybe it's not South Slavic-exclusive after all. Dijacz (talk) 02:54, 4 August 2026 (UTC)

boo

Originally an imitation of a cow's lowing (moo)? JMGN (talk) 23:53, 3 August 2026 (UTC)

Given that this sound is almost universal among a wide swath of the world's languages, the transfer (if true) must have happened before human language started to diversify. One problem is, though, that this was long before there was any animal domestication. Also, the theory does not explain what is scary about a cow’s mooing (for people not suffering from boophobia). And, as sounded when trying to scare someone, it doesn’t sound like a mooing cow. Perhaps it is an imitation of the sound of an exploding cow.  ​‑‑Lambiam 15:52, 4 August 2026 (UTC)

It might just sound a bit eerie, I guess. Wakuran (talk) 16:14, 5 August 2026 (UTC)

tatty

this might be a tatty

Etymology is given as Hindi, it is a kind of bamboo frame. What's the Hindi term? ~2026-39392-05 (talk) 10:11, 4 August 2026 (UTC)

• apparently it is टट्टी, which means feces. Perhaps we need to add a new definition there.--~2026-39392-05 (talk) 11:58, 4 August 2026 (UTC)

  Yes, the link to McGregor's dictionary currently listed at टट्टी (ṭaṭṭī) defines it as: f. sthg. woven: 1. a bamboo framework, trellis. 2. a screen (esp. of ḵẖas grass: kept wet, it cools the air entering a building); shutter. 3. transf. a lavatory. 4. excrement. —Mahāgaja · talk 17:33, 4 August 2026 (UTC)

Latin asbestos

Since asbestos came from Latin, could It there be more information there then, why there are no entries with it?, did somebody removed it because It doesn’t contains enough source?, Can I please add a Latin section? TheOneWhoaddssomething (talk) 13:50, 4 August 2026 (UTC)

If you think you are competent to add such a section in a way that is up to the standards of Wiktionary, give it a try.

At no time in the past has there been a Latin section on the page.  ​‑‑Lambiam 15:37, 4 August 2026 (UTC)

Somebody just removed the Latin section because the formatting is incorrect and I need to verify it? Pls I need support from you right now! TheOneWhoaddssomething (talk) 14:01, 6 August 2026 (UTC)

I've added back a section for the Latin term. Graearms (talk) 15:01, 6 August 2026 (UTC)

Mss and Mses.

I cannot find how these were formed (from Ms?) as variant plurals. JMGN (talk) 17:31, 4 August 2026 (UTC)

The first is Ms +‎ -s, similar to 6s = 6 + -s as seen e.g. here. The second, taking account of the pronunciation, is Ms +‎ -es, similar to 6es = 6 + -es as seen e.g. here.  ​‑‑Lambiam 06:39, 5 August 2026 (UTC)

تگلتو

RFV of the etymology. @Catonif. M Ali Kara (talk) 22:22, 4 August 2026 (UTC)

I can answer your question “(Can this(+) etymology be sourced?)” negatively. I had found no reference work, entry in academic databases etc. that even mentions this word, so I entered the closest possible match with a hedge—so you even know it exists!—, apparently typologically influenced by an entry such as دُخَس (duḵas). Fay Freak (talk) 13:19, 5 August 2026 (UTC)

Oh, it was you. It's of Mongolian origin, also borrowed into Turkic languages; with no relation to the Akkadian takiltu, except sounding similar. Can you revise it? M Ali Kara (talk) 13:38, 5 August 2026 (UTC)

@M Ali Kara: You probably know to write Mongolic terms and know other Mongolic material better. If I understand Doerfer, Gerhard (1965), Türkische und mongolische Elemente im Neupersischen [Turkic and Mongolian Elements in New Persian] (Akademie der Wissenschaften und der Literatur: Veröffentlichungen der Orientalischen Kommission)‎^[17] (in German), volume II, Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag, page 531 Nr. 920, the combination is not attested in Mongolic—and the Turkic terms are still from Persian—, and we have to cover another term Doerfer, Gerhard (1963), Türkische und mongolische Elemente im Neupersischen [Turkic and Mongolian Elements in New Persian] (Akademie der Wissenschaften und der Literatur: Veröffentlichungen der Orientalischen Kommission)‎^[18] (in German), volume I, Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag, page 327 Nr. 200 first, if one sees through Mongolic combination. Fay Freak (talk) 13:50, 5 August 2026 (UTC)

I'm flattered but no, I don't know. Somebody else can check it later or provide the original. There's no inherent reason to have Persian as the intermediary language in which the term doesn't antedate the Turkic ones. (At least according to the attestations included in Dehkhoda). It's attested in the w:Mamluk-Kipchak language, which is a better candidate if we were to look for a donor language. M Ali Kara (talk) 14:26, 5 August 2026 (UTC)

I saw your revision but still can't understand why do you think there must be an intermediary language. Can you support it? @Fay Freak M Ali Kara (talk) 21:18, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

@M Ali Kara: You mean to reach Anatolian Turkish from Mongolic? Not that it must, though 1. the vocalism fits exactly, i.e. it looks like it would look if the Old Ottoman was borrowed from Persian. It mostly copies an older belief though when additional Turkic and Mongolic material lacked so Ottoman Turkish terms were more easily claimed Persian. 2. I mean Mongolic borrowings in Persian that were then borrowed into Persian do exist! And all other combinations between these language groups. We even have terms borrowed from Azerbaijani into Persian and then Ottoman or similar, as in سورسات (sursât) (or is it actually from Mongolic? At least due to the later history of the thing itself there is no doubt it went the official route from Persian into Ottoman administrationese.) 3. It becomes more likely since the Mongolic combination with that suffix is still not attested. I don’t know which Mamluk-Kipchak you mean, add it. With some of the sources of Doerfer like Radloff I find it difficult to tell which language the form belongs to, so I just added that which I was confident to spell, not flipping around too much. As for your claim of one of either Persian or Ottoman antedating the other, I do not see it (not in {{R:ota:TS}} at least) and it would not be completely compelling. Fay Freak (talk) 22:17, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

Well, your only assumption, basically, is that Turkish and Mongolian didn't have any contact, which is easily refutable with history. For the vocalism, we wouldn't expect anything else. The literary language route or a learned borrowing is not the case here, since the nature of the term doesn't require it. Even if we assume that it could have been borrowed via Persian, for your sake, it's still not a definitive judgement that excludes direct borrowing. M Ali Kara (talk) 01:59, 9 August 2026 (UTC)

decennary

Is -ennis, as a combining form of annus, added to decem? Compare:

BIENNIUM: "equivalent to bi- + -enn- (combining form of annus) + -ium"

JMGN (talk) 08:53, 5 August 2026 (UTC)

پایدوس

RFV of the etymology. @Vahagn Petrosyan, @Fay Freak. Nişanyan, Sevan (2002–), “paydos”, in Nişanyan Sözlük. Nişanyan's explanation seems more correct and convincing. — This unsigned comment was added by M Ali Kara (talk • contribs).

@M Ali Kara: no, it's not convincing, especially since the Greek word he cites does not exist. We have discussed this at Wiktionary:Etymology_scriptorium/2021/July#paydos. --Vahag (talk) 11:43, 5 August 2026 (UTC)

Fay Freak's explanation seems even more obscure than his case against a Greek borrowing. The final -t can be explained as a parasitic epenthesis and f > p can be explained as a secondary development as there's also a dialectal form as "faydos." (“faydos”, in Türkiye'de halk ağzından derleme sözlüğü [Compilation Dictionary of Popular Speech in Turkey] (in Turkish), Ankara: Türk Dil Kurumu, 1963–1982, also see "payton", the reverse, < fayton) And the final -s can be seen as an over "Hellenization". Or it could be from a different etymon. Beside these, neither the imperative form of پاییدن nor the phrase itself (as *pây-dost) is attested. I think if a Persian explanation was possible Ahmet Vefik, Mehmet Salahi, Redhouse and other contemporaries would have already done the mental gymnastics for us and not resorted to Greek. M Ali Kara (talk) 12:19, 5 August 2026 (UTC)

Again, there is no Greek *φάγετος (*fágetos), so the point is moot. Vahag (talk) 12:28, 5 August 2026 (UTC)

This is completely irrational. If final -t can be explained as a parasitic epenthesis, the opposite can also occur, especially under the motive of Hellenization (which with all the Greeks in the capital area then might have been stronger than Persian in Late Ottoman, yet as seen in this example was still less accepted for new words), and p and f can flip in either direction. It is bizarre that 19th-century guesses are preferred by you. Did those guys ever work, i.e. manual labour? In neither explanation the original phrasing is attested. Fay Freak (talk) 13:13, 5 August 2026 (UTC)

"Pay dost" is also a 19th century guess only "attested" (a hapax, precisely) in Hindoglu, which is well-known for its coverage of the colloquial, vulgar forms of both spoken Turkish and Armenian. Based on the ambiguity of the term's etymon, it should be correctly labeled as "unknown" for now. "Pay dost" is not more valid than *φάγετος. M Ali Kara (talk) 13:27, 5 August 2026 (UTC)

Well German bei Fuß as suggested by the paper which due to the vocabulary I ascribe to Hammer-Purgstall is valid. 😛 Fay Freak (talk) 13:40, 5 August 2026 (UTC)

I suggest an improved Greek etymology. Redhouse's *φάγετος (*fágetos) does not exist, but I find Pontic Greek φαετό (faetó, “meal”), from Ancient Greek φαγητόν (phagētón). So how to explain -s? I suggest φαετό + 'ς, a contration of σου (sou, “your”). Ömer Asan records the Pontic phrase Το φαετό 'ς ̄κύρωσο "finish your food", which he transcribes to fayetos çireso. So, paydos = "your mealtime". --Vahag (talk) 15:04, 5 August 2026 (UTC)

We cannot take paydos as it is, to begin with, it definitely must be a corruption of something else, likely by mishearing, misunderstanding etc., so *fayetosu would make perfect sense, IMHO. M Ali Kara (talk) 15:45, 5 August 2026 (UTC)

None of it is convincing, IMO. The semantic leap from “your meal” to “work recess” appears formidable. The proposed Persian etymon would be believable if pây dôst was attested in the sense of “wait, friend”, but I don’t think it is. While we can mention some proposed theories, all are unsubstantiated, so in the end the etymology remains unknown.  ​‑‑Lambiam 09:53, 6 August 2026 (UTC)

nonoş

RFV of the etymology. — This unsigned comment was added by M Ali Kara (talk • contribs).

Source now provided. --Vahag (talk) 12:07, 5 August 2026 (UTC)

forceps – folk etymology?

De Vaan doesn’t seem to like the *formokaps theory. As for forfex, I don’t think he gives a definitive opinion (like we currently have written in the entry), and the form forpex also exists. — Polomo ⟨⁠ ⁠oi!⁠ ⁠⟩ · 15:20, 5 August 2026 (UTC)

I've added a lot more detail about the etymology. Graearms (talk) 01:23, 6 August 2026 (UTC)

Bilkun

RFV of the etymology. https://germanic.ge/en/got/word/bilaikan/ — This unsigned comment was added by ~2026-42985-52 (talk) at 17:32, 5 August 2026 (UTC).

A source demonstrating the existence of a word is not a source stating that something is derived from that word. — SURJECTION ^{/ T / C / L /} 17:46, 5 August 2026 (UTC)

To ground the linguistic steps in canonical dictionaries:The Gothic Stem: Joseph Wright’s Grammar of the Gothic Language / Mikhail Gukhman's Готский язык records bi-laikan as a strong class VII verb meaning "to mock, deride".The Uralic/Sami Connection: The authoritative Lexikon der älteren germanischen Lehnwörter in den ostseefinnischen Sprachen (LägLoS) documents the historical entry of the Germanic laik- stem passing into early Fennic as pilkka (mockery). The University of Tromsø's Giellatekno / Sátni databases document the identical cross-borrowed Northern Sami noun bilku (essive form bilkun) meaning "derision/mockery".The Slavic Morphology: Max Vasmer’s Etymological Dictionary of the Russian Language documents the functional constraints of the standard Slavic agent suffix -ун (-un) acting exclusively upon fixed verbal or phonetic stems. — This unsigned comment was added by ~2026-42985-52 (talk) at 02:40, 6 August 2026 (UTC).

None of which shows that the Ukrainian surname is derived from the Gothic verb. —Mahāgaja · talk 07:30, 6 August 2026 (UTC)

A practically working linguistic theory is better than none. ~2026-42985-52 (talk) 11:56, 6 August 2026 (UTC)

I don't know. Has someone actually proposed that the name is derived from the word? The jump from a derogatory nickname to an actual name would need some explaining. Wakuran (talk) 20:04, 6 August 2026 (UTC)

Margaret fish

This is defined as an eggcorn of margate fish, but an eggcorn requires a logically plausible connection (eg. preying mantis and praying mantis). What does the name "Margaret" have to do with a fish? Howardcorn33 (talk) 18:10, 5 August 2026 (UTC)

Yeah, it's more a folk etymology than an eggcorn. —Mahāgaja · talk 18:42, 5 August 2026 (UTC)

patio

From Spanish patio, either from Old Occitan patu or pati (compare Occitan and Catalan pati), from Late Latin pactus, from Latin pactum (“pact, agreement, bargain”), hence a doublet of pact, or alternatively from Latin patēre (“to lie open”).

Not at all clear what connection there could be with "pact, agreement, bargain". Would be useful to explain it. Mihia (talk) 23:42, 5 August 2026 (UTC)

According to etymonline, Old Occitan patu, pati meant “untilled land, communal pasture”. So a possible connection is that such land belonged to the commons by an unwritten pact.  ​‑‑Lambiam 09:14, 6 August 2026 (UTC)

I would say the derivation from Latin is correct, but not from compactum, "pact, agreement"; rather from compactus, "joined, constructed", either in the sense that the ground has been "compacted" (flattened) or constructed, or possibly from the use of "joined" stones or pavers to construct a floor. The sense of "pasture" in Occitan sounds like it would be derived from pagus, not pactus. P Aculeius (talk) 15:09, 6 August 2026 (UTC)

How did the com- of compactus manage to fall by the roadside on the journey from Latin to Spanish?  ​‑‑Lambiam 11:41, 8 August 2026 (UTC)

Perhaps the root is simply pactus rather than compactus, although it would hardly be unusual for a longer word to be abbreviated by dropping unstressed syllables. We still do that today. But I still think that a meaning referring to a pasture or field is likelier to be from pagus, instead of referring to some sort of "pact" rendering it common land. That explanation seems unnecessarily complex. P Aculeius (talk) 14:52, 8 August 2026 (UTC)

Aside from the distance in meaning, there is an unexplained phonetic problem with the given etymology from pactus/pactum: the first portion of the consonant sequence -ct- is expected to palatalize in Western Romance languages (giving *-jt- or similar outcomes), so I don't believe -at- is a regular outcome of -act- in Occitan or Catalan. Compare factum (which evolved to Catalan fet, Occitan fach) and lactem (which evolved to Catalan llet, Occitan lach, lèit, lait). Analogously, Latin pactum should have evolved to *pet or *pach, not patu/pati. The DLE refrains from speculating on the Spanish term's etymology, saying only "De or. inc.".--Urszag (talk) 17:52, 8 August 2026 (UTC)

This is why Coromines had such difficulty in giving out an origin for patio. He has another very intriguing idea alongside an origin in Latin pactus: By relating Occitan patu with padoir, a right to graze lands, he establishes a possible origin in Latin patens (“open, permitted”), a similar development to Sardinian padente (“forest”) and since the -oir ending had been largely forgotten by the later Romance speakers, it got nominalised into patu or later pati. However, he regards this nominisation development in Occitan as very uncommon, and since for one the term, if of Latin origin, must have been inherited semi-learned or learned with many complicated crossings involved and two, the apparent ancient element in the usage of patu and padoir, he concludes that maybe it is of pre-Roman Indo-European origin, specifically from the then suggested Sorotaptic branch of Indo-European, having an origin in Proto-Indo-European *peh₂-. Xwefeld (talk) 19:18, 8 August 2026 (UTC)

Reconstruction:Proto-Kartvelian/mc̣q̇aw- and Reconstruction:Proto-Georgian-Zan/c̣q̇aw-

These are labelled as alternative reconstructions on their respective pages even though they belong to separate languages. So, somebody needs to sort out what's going on here. Graearms (talk) 00:50, 6 August 2026 (UTC)

Might it be a geographic wanderwort or so? Wakuran (talk) 10:17, 6 August 2026 (UTC)

I don't really know enough about Kartvelian linguistics to judge, but the page for Svan წყაუ̂ (c̣q̇aû) says that it's not clear whether it was a borrowing or an inheritance. If this is the case, then we probably should delete the Proto-Kartvelian page, and keep only the Proto-Georgian Zan page, which seems to be much more solidly reconstructable. We could then mention the possible Proto-Kartvelian reconstruction on the etymology section for the Proto-Georgian-Zan entry. Graearms (talk) 16:25, 6 August 2026 (UTC)

I think the question is whether the Svan term is borrowed from Georgian or not, which has an impact on whether the term was in the reconstructed ancestor of Svan, Georgian and Zan or only Georgian and Zan. Thadh (talk) 10:20, 6 August 2026 (UTC)

thitsee

I found the Burmese word သစ်စေး, see Burmese Wikipedia article. Can someone who knows the language, or at least enough to give the etymology, tidy up the thitsee page? ~2026-39392-05 (talk) 11:02, 6 August 2026 (UTC)

• never mind. Alternative form of thitsi --~2026-39392-05 (talk) 11:13, 6 August 2026 (UTC)

乪

the actual heck did the middle chinese ancestor sound like, im guessing /ŋkəŋk/ though im pretty sure that isnt a phonotactically valid syllable in any language ever, correct me if im wrong although that isnt the point of the subject ~2026-43553-21 (talk) 22:11, 6 August 2026 (UTC)

I guess it's valid. I believe I can produce it passably, at least, although it's not particularly, what's the term now... euphonious. Wakuran (talk) 01:10, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

what i meant was, where the hell did that Cantonese reading come from ~2026-43498-30 (talk) 17:35, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

Pogue

"Variant of the surname Pollock influenced by Irish póg (“kiss”)." Really? Why?- -sche (discuss) 03:24, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

wang (Old English)

This entry has two definitions (field and cheek) under one etymology. The Dutch entry for wang however indicates these should be two different etymologies. Griffon77 (talk) 19:35, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

The West Germanic roots seem to separate the senses. I'd argue the development of an alternate form of the cheek sense in OE seems to derive then from wange, not a new sense of wang "field". Griffon77 (talk) 19:54, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

It is implied that the sense "cheek" has survived in English, but there's no modern listing on Wiktionary. Maybe it's dialectal. Wakuran (talk) 17:36, 8 August 2026 (UTC)

brontobyte

The page for brontobyte claims that it is derived from bronto- +‎ byte (à la brontosaurus); however, I think it is more plausible that it is a blend of brontosaurus and byte. It's possible the bronto- in brontobyte is a libfix, but with no other words using it, it's hard to say. Does anyone here know the true etymology of this term? 𝕷𝖚𝖓𝖆𝖗𝖑𝖚𝖕𝖎𝖞𝖊☾𝕿☽⚸ 21:16, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

The term is defined in a “vocabulary drill” in an issue of A-E-C Autømation Newsletter of 1992. Unfortunately, I can't coax GBS into showing the actual definition given. This precedes the introduction of the prefix ronna- by 30 years, so the similarity between /ˈɹɒnə/ and /ˈbɹɒntə/ has played no role (or did, perhaps, the influence go the other way? – the proposer of ronna was certainly aware of the bronto prefix^[19]*).

In any case, yes, the consensus (see also the article linked to in the parenthesis above) is that this bronto- came from brontosaurus. There already was the English word brontometer in which the prefix does mean “thunder”, so, apart from not following the *a- pattern of mega- and higher SI prefixes, a generally applied bronto- metric prefix would also have been confusing.  ​‑‑Lambiam 11:34, 8 August 2026 (UTC)

---

 * Actually, the SI prefix for 10⁻²⁷, the inverse of ronna-, is ronto-. Coincidence? I doubt it.  ​‑‑Lambiam 18:15, 8 August 2026 (UTC)

hobby, hobby horse

1. The etymology at hobby gives a long derivation stretching back to words meaning "to hop" and "to bend", which is presented as fact. Then the next paragraph gives a contradictory explanation: "Possibly originally from a proper name for a horse, a diminutive of Robert or Robin". If the second explanation is credible then the first explanation also needs some words such as "possibly".

2. The etymology at hobby seems to mostly relate to the term hobby horse, of which hobby is said to be a shortened form, while hobby horse presently has no etymology section at all. Wouldn't it make sense to move most content to hobby horse?

3. While hobby horse has no etymology section per se, the "original" meaning is said to be "The Irish Hobby, an extinct breed of horse", which some sources say has a Gaelic origin, but this is not mentioned at all in the etymology chain at hobby.

I rarely edit etymology sections myself because I don't have the required expertise, but if anyone can make sense of the above, please feel free! Mihia (talk) 11:43, 8 August 2026 (UTC)