Talk:привод

(Notifying Atitarev, Cinemantique, Useigor, Wikitiki89, Stephen G. Brown, Guldrelokk, Fay Freak, Tetromino, Per utramque cavernam): What would you say the etymology of при́вод is? It's clear that приво́д is deverbal from приводи́ть (privodítʹ) (or привести́ (privestí)?), but it's less clear for при́вод. Is this при- added onto the combining form of води́ть (vodítʹ)? If so, why? Anyone know how recent this word is? Benwing2 (talk) 17:43, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

@Benwing2: Приво́д is the usual kind of prefixal deverbative from привести́, with fixed accent on the root. The other, much rarer type has stress on the prefix (originally with lateral mobility), like deverbatives from regular a. p. c verbs: при́вод, по́вод, не́вод, о́бод, у́повод belong here. Note how their meaning is more idiomatic, which is why the aberrant accent has been preserved. The accentual history of Slavic prefixal derivatives is complicated and not known with certainty. Guldrelokk (talk) 21:36, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

@Guldrelokk Would you still say that prefixal-stress nouns like при́вод, по́вод, до́вод, про́вод etc. are consistently derived from the corresponding verbs приводи́ть, поводи́ть, доводи́ть, проводи́ть, etc. or is it possible that they were derived directly by adding a prefix при-,по-, до-, про-, etc. onto the nominalized verbal root? In many of these cases it's hard to see the connection between noun and verb, and I wouldn't be surprised to find that in some cases the verb doesn't even exist. As an example, I wonder whether по́вар "cook, chef" is derived from повари́ть "to spend some time cooking" or simply from вари́ть "to cook" with a prefix по- meaning something or other (not quite sure what). Benwing2 (talk) 23:13, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

@Benwing2: At least по́вод and про́вод (cf. про́воды) are old and deverbal, although their meaning has been extended. До́вод is also old, originally meaning ‘testimony’, from доводити ‘inform, testify’ (for semantics compare доно́с, доноси́ть) and sometimes ascribed to Polish influence; it is usually accented дово́дъ in older texts, but cf. Zizanius’ lexis. I do not know the word history of при́вод. По́вар is from поварити ‘to cook’ with perfective по- (СРНГ XXVII 222, cf. соли́ть ~ посоли́ть). Guldrelokk (talk) 00:59, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

(Notifying Atitarev, Cinemantique, Useigor, Wikitiki89, Stephen G. Brown, Guldrelokk, Fay Freak, Tetromino, Per utramque cavernam): BTW Zaliznyak says привод meaning "(disk) drive, (chain) drive, etc." can be stressed either приво́д (normal usage, pl. приво́ды) or при́вод (professional usage, pl. привода́). Is this correct? Benwing2 (talk) 23:23, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

@Benwing2: It is correct but the professional usage is more common for this sense. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 00:02, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

Apparently this is what normative dictionaries say, although при́вод ~ при́воды is the only paradigm I am familiar with. Guldrelokk (talk) 00:59, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

@Guldrelokk Can you point to any online sources for the etymologies you're citing? Benwing2 (talk) 01:15, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

@Benwing2: E. g. Шапошников, Этимологический словарь современного русского языка: повар (II 143), провод (II 226), довод (I 233). The rest is in Vasmer. Guldrelokk (talk) 01:44, 8 March 2019 (UTC)