Reconstruction talk:Proto-West Germanic/funkōn

Verb

@DerRudymeister If the verb had not extra-non-West-Germanic cognates then we don't reconstruct it for Proto-Germanic, unless it was form by derivational process that did not exist in the daughter languages. That being said, this is a weak class 2 West Germanic only, which means this should be moved to Proto-West-Germanic. Moreover, you wrote "The original paradigm consisted of two stem variants, *funk- against *fung-" but where did you get this information? As I can't find this in Kroonen. Lastly this seems to me to be *funkô +‎ *-ōną instead of Kroonen's claim that Proto-Germanic *funkô derives from Proto-Germanic *funkōną. 𐌷𐌻𐌿𐌳𐌰𐍅𐌹𐌲𐍃 𐌰𐌻𐌰𐍂𐌴𐌹𐌺𐌹𐌲𐌲𐍃 (talk) 17:49, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

@Holodwig21 The problem with this verb is that the root is observed to show alternations between -nk and -ng in the causative verb (page 127 & 141), the -nk is secondary it arose in the iterative by Kluge's law, being derived from an unattested primary strong verb *finhaną. The alternation *funk- next to *fung- is a logical consequence of this derivation. You're right about the verb being only attested in west germanic as such, however since *finkaną was derived *funkōną, both verbs should be considered west-germanic only. Lastly, if we consider this verb to be an iterative, than it can't be derived from a noun like you suggest, because *-ōną iteratives are only formed from strong verbs.--DerRudymeister (talk) 18:56, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

@DerRudymeister I understand your argument but Kluge's law is controversial. Moreover, when would "*funk-" or "*fung-" have been used, in the singular? plural? or in both? As they way it is now it looks like "*funk-" was used in the singular and "*fung-" in the plural. 𐌷𐌻𐌿𐌳𐌰𐍅𐌹𐌲𐍃 𐌰𐌻𐌰𐍂𐌴𐌹𐌺𐌹𐌲𐌲𐍃 (talk) 19:47, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

@Holodwig21 -nk- in the singular, -ng- in the plural. Why is kluge's law suddenly considered controversial? It's all over the proto-germanic entries, many of which you added yourself. The alternations of -kk- next -g-, -pp- next to -b-, -tt- next to -d- have the same origin. But perhaps it's better to remove it from this entry, because the variant with -ng- is never attested as an iterative.

It's not generally accepted in the linguistic community. Ringe doesn't accept it for example. But because Kroonen accepts it, it has made its way into our entries unquestioned. —Rua (mew) 09:50, 12 February 2020 (UTC)