Reconstruction talk:Proto-Germanic/taskǭ

So the Low German and Dutch words are native, while the High German word is borrowed via Frankish from Latin? This is just a random combination of two theories (Latin > Germanic or Germanic > Latin) into one, in order to avoid the difficulty of High German t- instead of z-. The origin of this word is unknown. Simply. Kolmiel (talk) 16:54, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

But Old High German has zasca (“satchel; saddle-bag”) (glossed clitella)...the excpected outcome of the PGmc *taskǭ Leasnam (talk) 18:53, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

A single time, yes. But Old High German also has "dasca" and "dasga", and Old Saxon has "dasga" as well.

Here's a little overview:

Pfeifer: Etymologisches Wörterbuch (1989): „Die Herkunft [...] ist nicht geklärt“. (The origin [...] is unsettled.)

Kluge: Etymologisches Wörterbuch (2002): „Herkunft unklar.“ (Origin obscure.)

Van Veen/van der Sijs: Van Dale Etymologisch Woordenboek (1997): „Etymologie onzeker.“ (Etymology uncertain.)

Philippa: Etymologisch Woordenboek (2009): „Herkomst onbekend.“ (Origin unknown.)

Duden Online: „Herkunft ungeklärt.“ (Etymology unsettled.)

And Philippa explicitly says: „De Romaanse woorden zijn wrsch. aan het Oudhoogduits ontleend.“ (The Romance words were probably borrowed from Old High German.) Kolmiel (talk) 23:25, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, I figured that as well, it looks a bit strange. (Particularly as it's described as being borrowed from 'Italian', instead of Vulgar Latin. Wakuran (talk) 11:33, 31 October 2018 (UTC)