Talk:𐌰𐌹𐍈𐍃

RFV discussion: June–November 2016

The following information has failed Wiktionary's verification process (permalink).

Failure to be verified means that insufficient eligible citations of this usage have been found, and the entry therefore does not meet Wiktionary inclusion criteria at the present time. We have archived here the disputed information, the verification discussion, and any documentation gathered so far, pending further evidence.
Do not re-add this information to the article without also submitting proof that it meets Wiktionary's criteria for inclusion.

---

𐌰𐌹𐍈𐍃

Supposedly the Gothic descendant of *ehwaz. I can't find it in the Gothic corpus using wulfila.be (not by itself nor as part of a compound), but I may be overlooking something. — Kleio (t · c) 01:23, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Well, it's apparently attested in compounds, but not on its own. Köbler marks it as reconstructed. I suppose this should be moved to the Reconstruction namespace. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 01:32, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Interesting, in which compound does your source find it? — Kleio (t · c) 01:50, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

aiƕatundi —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 01:55, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Hm, I had actually found that one but the semantic gulf between [thorny] bush --> horse was a bit too much for me, assumed that element must've been something else. But plant names are often pretty weird in other languages too. To the reconstruction namespace it is, then! — Kleio (t · c) 02:00, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Moved to reconstruction, original page and romanization should be deleted. — Kleio (t · c) 12:14, 27 November 2016 (UTC)