Talk:chậu
Latest comment: 1 year ago by 范俊華 in topic Etymology
Etymology[edit]
@范俊華 Do you have a source supporting the non-SV etymology you put? Also @PhanAnh123. RcAlex36 (talk) 02:34, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
- It's another case of connecting a Vietnamese with a Sinitic word based on superficial similarity (or maybe not even that, the editor mentioned non-Sino-Japanese reading). This time there are so many things wrong with the etymology though, that I'm baffled it's even suggested. PhanAnh123 (talk) 02:43, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
- Really? I thought it made sense with the Japanese reading, representing the two NSV readings:
- とう - thau
- ちゅう - chậu
- but if you think that there is no way that "thau" and "chậu" are related, then I guess they aren’t. 范俊華 (talk) 02:55, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
- Honestly, I strongly suggest memorizing the tonal correspondences between Vietnamese and the historical stages of Chinese, it's highly useful to indicate what is actually plausible and what can be dismissed without a second thought; for example, unless it's an obvious recent vernacular loan, Vietnamese word with an A tone (ngang and huyền) can correspond to a Sinitic word with either A tone (平, the usual correspondence) or C tone (去, the correspondence in a subset of loans borrowed before the Middle Chinese period), and never with a B tone (上). In this case, the tone of chậu is B2, which tells us two things: the earlier onset was likely voiced and the tone of the donative Sinitic form (if it's indeed a loan) was either B or C: 鍮 has neither of those two indications. The onsets are also a mismatch regardless of the tone. PhanAnh123 (talk) 04:49, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
- I see, thank you. 范俊華 (talk) 10:11, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
- Honestly, I strongly suggest memorizing the tonal correspondences between Vietnamese and the historical stages of Chinese, it's highly useful to indicate what is actually plausible and what can be dismissed without a second thought; for example, unless it's an obvious recent vernacular loan, Vietnamese word with an A tone (ngang and huyền) can correspond to a Sinitic word with either A tone (平, the usual correspondence) or C tone (去, the correspondence in a subset of loans borrowed before the Middle Chinese period), and never with a B tone (上). In this case, the tone of chậu is B2, which tells us two things: the earlier onset was likely voiced and the tone of the donative Sinitic form (if it's indeed a loan) was either B or C: 鍮 has neither of those two indications. The onsets are also a mismatch regardless of the tone. PhanAnh123 (talk) 04:49, 13 July 2022 (UTC)