User talk:CodeCat

Definition from Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Jump to: navigation, search
Archives: 2009-2010 · 2011 · 2012
Start a new discussion

Contents

Thread titleRepliesLast modified
Mewbot mistakes117:07, 22 August 2015
MewBot miscategorised a bunch of French noun plural forms121:55, 20 August 2015
Mewbot118:14, 19 August 2015
Template with extra linefeed205:47, 19 August 2015
plurals > noun plural forms607:31, 18 August 2015
Java isn't Javanese301:59, 18 August 2015
Hebrew roots.620:43, 17 August 2015
Spanish feminine nouns009:24, 17 August 2015
Finnish allative is NOT llex306:18, 16 August 2015
Postalveolar sounds515:30, 13 August 2015
Wikidata item213:33, 13 August 2015
The code for script detection112:31, 13 August 2015
German templates001:51, 10 August 2015
*kh₂eyd-1116:38, 9 August 2015
Catalan verb morphology: other dialects923:15, 8 August 2015
Catalan: "este" and "eixe"1019:58, 7 August 2015
Telugu lists113:46, 5 August 2015
κυκλῶν223:20, 3 August 2015
Template:sla-conj-j/a519:30, 31 July 2015
Your edit on Stoppel214:07, 30 July 2015
First page
First page
Previous page
Previous page
Last page
Last page

Mewbot mistakes

diff

DTLHS (talk)17:05, 22 August 2015

Thank you for letting me know, but the script that did that is probably already deleted as it was a one-off.

CodeCat17:07, 22 August 2015
 

MewBot miscategorised a bunch of French noun plural forms

as noun plural form\s. see here

Enosh (talk)21:47, 20 August 2015

Yes, that was an early mistake. I fixed it for English, I didn't realise it also affected French entries. I'll fix them soon.

CodeCat21:55, 20 August 2015
 

Your edits are showing up in recent changes- do you not have a bot flag any more?

DTLHS (talk)18:12, 19 August 2015

So are SemperBlottoBot's. It seems to be a sudden bug.

CodeCat18:14, 19 August 2015
 

Template with extra linefeed

When {{prefixsee}} appears at the end of a section it throws an extra linefeed (see γιοττα-) - can be got around by omitting the gap between sections - but is it something which can be fixed?

  — Saltmarshσυζήτηση-talk05:26, 17 August 2015

This is presumably a bug in the #categorytree extension. There's not much I can do about it. You'll have to report it to the maintainers of that extension.

CodeCat13:59, 17 August 2015

I've asked User:DTLHS - hope this is the right person. Cheers

  — Saltmarshσυζήτηση-talk05:47, 19 August 2015
 
 

plurals > noun plural forms

I just noticed you made this change to creationrules.js, which is okay, but it leaves things broken. So could you please go and fix anything that's feeding into Category:(language) plurals at the moment? I'd appreciate it if you'd deal with Swahili very soon, since I'm currently working on it — that'll mean dealing with {{sw-noun}} and running a bot over the rest.

Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds01:06, 17 August 2015

I'm trying to be extra cautious in case Dan kicks up a storm for not liking it again...

CodeCat01:53, 17 August 2015

I'm sure he will, but I'll assume there was consensus in this case (although I haven't checked). Regardless, could you please deal with the repercussions so we don't have inconsistencies?

Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds03:11, 17 August 2015

I've started running a bot to change the English entries. It will take a while though, there's over 100k entries in there.

CodeCat14:09, 17 August 2015

I don't remember seeing this change discussed. Have I got to change all my bots again?

SemperBlotto (talk)14:16, 17 August 2015

It's been right at the top of this month's BP for the past two weeks.

CodeCat14:22, 17 August 2015
 
 
 
 
 

Java isn't Javanese

I know you didn't mean to add 17 programming-related entries to the non-existent category Category:Javanese English- but it looks like you did. Please fix that as soon as you can. Thanks!

Chuck Entz (talk)02:27, 17 August 2015

But then what should be done for words that are used only on the island of Java?

CodeCat13:56, 17 August 2015

The label Java should presumably be reserved for those. The label being used doesn't even link right — it goes to the island (w:Java) rather than to w:Java (programming language). So maybe we need a new topic label for that which handles the link to WP right and categorises right.

Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds00:04, 18 August 2015
 

So far, there aren't any. All of the entries in Category:Javanese English use "Java" to refer to the programming language. If you think about it, most of the localized vocabulary is in separate lects such as Javanese, not in Indonesian or English or Dutch. It looks to me like a choice between accommodating actual usage as opposed to the nebulous theoretical potential for maybe a term or two to use the other version.

The problem here is that you've forced a massive restructuring of a sizable chunk of our categories all at once, without anyone having a chance to weigh in. Even if you were all-knowing, free of all bias, and perfect (you aren't- but then, no one is), there would be quite a bit of disruption. As it is, it will take a very long time for rfm to deal with the mess. I realize that some people will attack you no matter what you do, but you shouldn't be giving legitimate reasons for others to join them.

Chuck Entz (talk)01:59, 18 August 2015
 
 

Hebrew roots.

Dear (Mr. CodeCat),

Thank you for your message. It is not right for me to assume an evolutional root for present words from a pre-Babel language. It is a known fact that most of the dialects around Caucasus are entirely distinct. One of them has been stated to be the origin of the Basque grammar; but that is beside the point. No one can prove that many language heads did not start up at the time of the confusion of languages. I, personally like to cite a word that is attested for a stock root, rather than making up a conjectured one. I have had to research into pre-Aryan languages, such as Basque and Finnish, in order to decipher some of the words of unknown origin. To provide an example of an unintelligent conjecture that I made, regarding the origin of Basque for 5 as 'basti', and 'nilar' for 4; but that was just ignorance. The nearest to the stock root is Turkish BESH, (long E). The nasalised Indo-European root, PENKWE answers to most European forms, but Finnish VISI is ultimately allied with Basque BOST. An old Semitic word for 5 is MACH, and they all answer to a stock root, MESH in Hebrew CHAMESH, probably from its usage, in spite of all having distinct languages at the time. Another common Eurasian prefix is MAN, implying habitation in various contexts. This answers to Hebrew MAON (den, or habitation). I have had discussions on this subject with a friend who has a degree in ancient languages.

Werdna Yrneh Yarg (talk)18:16, 11 August 2015

For starters, not Mr. CodeCat. Don't assume.

You'll have to clarify what you mean by "pre-Babel" language or "pre-Aryan", those are not terms I've ever come across before. But what you're doing now is basically pseudoscience. You can't just compare two random words in widely different languages and say that they're related. English is not related to Hebrew, Indo-European is not related to Finnish and not to Basque.

If your friend really has a degree in linguistics, and accepts all of this, then I honestly worry for their contributions to science.

CodeCat18:27, 11 August 2015

Thank you for your message. I fully realise that two similar words of similar meaning belonging to diverse language families cannot be merely connected without an older stock root from a parent language or analogous words retained in the minds of such speakers. My usage and style was NOT derived from my friend, otherwise I can sympathise with your last sentence. I learned most of my pre-research of ancient languages from 'the Loom of Language' by Bodmer. By pre-Aryan, I was referring the the older family stock of Finn-Ugrian that includes Magyar, parent of Hungarian and Finnish, that as you state, are outside of the Indo-European family. However there was a period when only one language was spoken, that I wrongly believed to be Akkadian as being the first Semetic language to disappear, as well as being antediluvian. Sumerian, as one of ancient languages, was restored and in use until about the time of Sanskrit that led to Prakrit. It must also be realised that the ancient languages of Britain belonged to different families: it must not be assumed that they were all Indo-European; because, for example, the two main verbs, to be and to possess, in Pictish are strongly connected with those in Basque that is constitutionally separate in its syntax, et cetera, from all the other language heads. Indo-European, for example is, Japhetic, whereas Iberian, or Punic and Hebrew are Semetic. In Cornwall we have the Iron Age Celtic derivative 'DIN...' for a fort, from Celtic 'DUN' whence our word DOWN (hill), possibly through Old Saxon though; whereas the other preposition 'KER' = Welsh 'CAER' is akin to Punic QERETH (town or city), from another stock entirely. It is these oldest words in English that have slipped through the multitude of conquests, that have been my focal point of attention. When writing out all the mediaeval and older words in the English dictionary commencing A and B, eight years ago, I was quite free to admit that only about 0.2% did I need to change. I used the Oxford Etymological Dictionary as my base source. This was a hobbly of mine since I was seventeen.

Kind Regards,

Werdna Yrneh Yarg (talk)19:23, 11 August 2015

Where are you getting the idea that at one point only one language was spoken? See w:Proto-Human language, where it's noted that this idea is seriously criticised and linguists consider it unscientific. Even smaller "macro-families" like Nostratic have not gained wide acceptance in linguistics, so Proto-Human is way out there. If we're going to discuss etymology on Wiktionary, you have to at least be aware of and speak in terms of current scientific consensus.

CodeCat19:28, 11 August 2015

Thank you, and also thanks for the two messages on editors' news. Kind Regards, Andrew

Werdna Yrneh Yarg (talk)19:43, 17 August 2015

Werdna, you may wish to read the article "How likely are chance resemblances between languages?" over on the Zompist blog. This addresses the pattern of correspondences you describe above.

You may also find "Proto-World and the Language Instinct" of interest. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 19:53, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig19:53, 17 August 2015
 

‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig Thank you so much for this information that I am perusing. I made sure that I perused the sites on Sound Changes, to refresh my mind on Grimm's law and other laws, before editing Talk pages on certain words. My aim is to be available towards perfecting Wiktionary etymologies of illusive words, to make sure that it is indisputably the most reliable reference. Certain Proto Indo-European roots have caused me concern, particularly that of DOWN, where the meaning changes abruptly and could well be criticised by professional etymologists. It is always safer to be able to cite a known language for the period of the unattested = * root, such as Hittite for an axe, under etymology for ADZE, that I always regarded as an Iberian word that remained through the conquests. Since the spelling changes considerably over the years, and there are a number of such words in Spanish, some of which were borrowed into Basque, two or three illusive words may have these remote connections. You may be interested that English BAD is cited in the Guiness Book of Records as the oldest English word; but I reject folk etymologies. All of what you have recommended for me will be essential if I am to edit words seriously. Kind Regards, Andrew

Werdna Yrneh Yarg (talk)20:43, 17 August 2015
 
 
 
 

Spanish feminine nouns

Thanks for making the changes to Spanish noun forms. I've cleaned up a few, but then noticed that it was tedious. Any chance MewBot could make these kind of revisions?

A230rjfowe (talk)09:24, 17 August 2015

Finnish allative is NOT llex

Finnish allative ending is lle and not llex.

Please remove the x

I see from discussion on this page that the x is intended to signify a gemination.... but the gemination effect applies to ALL instances when a Finnish word ends in a single e- and rules do not allow for the e to be elongated to ee. For instance, the polite request "tulepa tänne" (come here) is pronounced as if it were written "tuleppa tänne". Your inclusion of a marker for this effect is inappropriate and confusing to the average reader. Even a Finn would not understand this llex terminology unless he or she is also an expert in phonetics. Or else a fan of Daniel Abondalo ;) ~~

87.92.144.10313:06, 24 July 2015

CodeCat, you have done marvellous things for the Finnish templates, but I completely agree with the Anon commentator that you have erred on this one. The little x'es are merely confusing users. Be so kind and remove them.

Hekaheka (talk)05:11, 13 August 2015

Ok, I've removed it.

CodeCat11:40, 13 August 2015

Thx.

Hekaheka (talk)06:18, 16 August 2015
 
 
 

Postalveolar sounds

Hi, Do you know whether there is a difference between [sʲ] and [ɕ] (that is, a difference between the palatalized alveolar sibilants and the alveolo-palatal "fully palatalized" postalveolar sibilants)?

Jackwolfroven (talk)20:08, 20 October 2013

I don't really know. I suspect that there is, by some formal definition, but I have no idea if that difference matters in practice.

CodeCat20:12, 20 October 2013
 
Edited by another user.
Last edit: 15:30, 13 August 2015

I happened to come across this discussion and just had to butt in. In Russian, [sʲ] and [ɕ] are two entirely different sounds, as demonstrated by the minimal pair ще́ли ‎(ščéli, cracks, fissures) [ˈɕelʲɪ] and се́ли ‎(séli, sat down (pl.)) [ˈsʲelʲɪ].

WikiTiki8918:12, 23 October 2013

My understanding is that [ɕ] is effectively synonymous with [ʃʲ]; no language contrasts them, and it isn't even clear what the putative difference between them could be.

Aɴɢʀ (talk)20:52, 23 October 2013

That sounds about right. I've never seen it described like that though, I've only seen [ɕ] described as [ʂʲ], but [ʃʲ] makes a lot more sense.

WikiTiki8921:13, 23 October 2013

Yeah, I realize now that I should have been asking about a distinction between [ʃʲ] and [ɕ], thanks.

Jackwolfroven (talk)00:54, 24 October 2013
 
 
 
 

Wikidata item

Hi, CodeCat, I was wondering if this also is applicable here. (example: aanwijzing, where the language links are still at the bottom of the page). Thank you for your time.

Lotje (talk)04:54, 16 July 2015

The people at Wikidata have so far not shown much interest in handling interwiki links. They seem to want to come up with much more complicated solutions, which then always get refused by the Wiktionary people themselves.

CodeCat13:25, 16 July 2015

Thank you, I guess it poses a problem indeed. Face-smile.svg Lotje (talk) 13:33, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Lotje (talk)13:33, 13 August 2015
 
 

The code for script detection

We used to have several lines for detecting script based on the characters of the term given, in Module:utilities I think. Do you know where it is now?

Z12:30, 13 August 2015

It's now in Module:scripts.

CodeCat12:31, 13 August 2015
 

German templates

Apparently my ping didn't work. Could you take a gander at this?

JohnC501:51, 10 August 2015

Is that a better? I wish you would at least warn me before deleting these entries. I've gotten a lot better at PIE reconstruction, and some of my early entries are not as accurate as they should be, but you could at least ask me whether I could find more descendants now. No offense meant, and also realize I may be being a little touchy about this for no good reason.

PS: I fixed up *wéh₁itis.

JohnC503:10, 29 July 2015

I'm not sure what deleted entry you're actually referring to. In any case I didn't really look at who created it, and it's nothing personal. There's just a lot of bad etymological stuff around and it's hard to tell between usable stuff and junk. So I would rather err on the side of caution. I won't mind at all if you restore stuff I delete, as long as it's improved of course.

CodeCat14:35, 29 July 2015

Cool, cool. Could I also ask, as you move inflected stems into the main root articles (e.g. *gʷʰer-), that you add the conjugation tables in with them? I think that they are useful and am sorry to see them disappear.

JohnC518:11, 29 July 2015

I'm wondering about that myself. The difficulty is that a root by itself doesn't have any kind of conjugation. But where else can we put it?

CodeCat18:42, 29 July 2015

Yeah, I was wondering that myself. You could put it under each stem's bullet point; though, that would going against normal practices and divisions. You could also have an Inflection header with subsections for each stem. It's an interesting dilemma, but as I say, I'd still love to have the tables.

JohnC519:30, 29 July 2015

I guess this would be material for BP or ID.

CodeCat19:40, 29 July 2015
 
 
 
 
 

Catalan verb morphology: other dialects

Edited by author.
Last edit: 21:16, 8 August 2015

Hello,

I was wondering if you had plans in mind to cover the verb morphology of other Catalan dialects. I'm not necessarily requesting that you do anything about it, but since this seems to be your domain, I thought I might as well start talking to you about it, in case I or someone else might wish to take a stab at it sometime.

At the very least, the basics of Standard Valencian should get some sort of coverage; it's more or less like this (I may be missing a few things):

  • -e rather than -o for first-person singular indicative
    • jo parle
  • -isc rather than -eix for the first person singular indicative of the inchoatives and -isc as the base for most of their subjunctive forms
    • jo preferisc ... jo/ell preferisca
  • Lack of marking for first-person singular in the indicative for verbs like sentir and rebre
    • jo sent, jo rep
  • -ra- imperfect subjunctives (that more or less resemble the typical preterite endings) in addition to the normal ones
    • jo/ell parlara in addition to jo/ell parlés
  • e rather than i in the first-conjugation present subjunctives, a rather than i in the first- and third-person singular forms of third-conjugation verbs and e rather than i in the second-person singular and third-person plural of such verbs, a rather than i in the first- and third-person singular forms of second-conjugation verbs, and e rather than i for the remaining forms in second-conjugation verbs
    • jo/ell parle, jo/ell preferisca ... nosaltres preferim ... ells preferisquen , jo/ell incloga ... tu inclogues ... ells incloguen
  • Preference for different models for various verbs, such as llegir
    • jo/ell llig rather than jo llegisc and ell llegix/llegeix (though also valid), ...

Though, the AVL permits many variant forms and this may prevent us from simply shoving everything in the existing tables, depending on what we may wish to show and represent:

  • Inchoative -ix or -eix (both variants included in their tables)
  • Variant and classical forms (some included in the tables, others relegated to the notes beneath the tables)
    • jo faç (classical 1st. pres. ind. form) (in table) and jo lligc (in notes only)
  • Regional forms (notes)
    • First-person singular indicative -o rather than -e/0 from the northern Valencian dialects (jo parlo, jo llijo, ...)
  • Very formal present subjunctives/imperatives and first-person singular indicatives (only present in the inchoatives, I think; notes)
    • jo preferesc ... jo/ell preferesca

(I'll throw up some sample tables in userspace, if you want)

Finally, for words such as tenir and venir, the AVL prefers the -dre variants, having the -ir forms merely link to the -dre forms. What exactly should we do about this?

I myself think it would be best if we had a table for each dialect to help reduce confusion as much as possible, to allow the inclusion of as many forms as possible, and to make things easier for peripheral dialects that may deviate even more from Standard Central Catalan than does Standard Valencian. I would indeed eventually like to have the more peripheral dialects represented, but sadly, I cannot discuss them just yet... except maybe for Algherese since I have some materials for it (though, I'm still rather hesitant...).

What do you think?

Thanks.

Espreon (talk)21:09, 8 August 2015

I have thought about this before. Standard Valencian should certainly be included. I'm a bit more hesitant about other forms... if we start adding too many, the table will become an unreadable mess like the ones at the Catalan Wiktionary. So let's look at adding standard Valencian first, and once that's done we can review.

Two tables seems like a good idea, at least for the two standard forms. Not sure how to handle dialectal forms; creating tables for every possible variation would just result in massive numbers of tables. Again, another reason to start with standard forms first and then reevaluate.

CodeCat21:14, 8 August 2015

Right, anything but that mess... that's more or less why I proposed tables for each dialect.

Depending on how we do things, I don't think having a table for each dialect group would be too much. Though, I think we might need to have multiple tables for a single dialect group for some verbs (such as llegir), and if we need to do that for multiple dialect groups, then things will likely get out of hand very easily...

But indeed, let's take care of Valencian before considering the other groups. I'll work on some tables in userspace and show you the results when I'm done.

How does that sound?

Espreon (talk)21:27, 8 August 2015

Keep in mind that the current tables are mostly Lua based. So you should probably copy Module:ca-verb to your userspace. Then you can modify it to show AVL forms instead of IEC forms. Once that's done, I can see if I can merge your table into the existing module.

CodeCat21:30, 8 August 2015

Right.

I was just gonna manually fill in some tables, but I guess that's a better idea.

Espreon (talk)21:42, 8 August 2015
 

I manually created a theoretical maximal table so that I'll have a reference when I get to tinkering with the module; please tell me what you think of it: User:Espreon/llegir-valencian-test.

Do you think I should separate the -r and the -s imperfect subjunctives like that, as is done with their Spanish equivalents on this site, or do you think I should collapse them into a single row? For ser, at least, the -r forms can also act as conditionals, so maybe it would be best to have them separated.

Espreon (talk)22:38, 8 August 2015

I'm not sure. My hope was that we could simply reuse the existing table, and only change the forms that go in it.

CodeCat22:59, 8 August 2015
 
 
 
 
 

Catalan: "este" and "eixe"

Hello,

I wanted to add entries for este and eixe, but I cannot seem to get them properly inflected for masculine plural (estos and eixos respectively). I tried tinkering and poking around, but to no avail.

Is it currently possible to get them properly inflected, or will someone have to make some changes somewhere?

Thanks.

Espreon (talk)16:26, 7 August 2015

How do they actually inflect, in full?

CodeCat18:49, 7 August 2015

Like so:

este (masculine singular), esta (feminine singular), estos (masculine plural), estes (feminine plural)

eixe (masculine singular), eixa (feminine singular), eixos (masculine plural), eixes (feminine plural)

Espreon (talk)18:59, 7 August 2015

Ok, I'll have a look at the module. Are there any other words with -e in the masculine singular and -os in the masculine plural? Or are these the only ones?

CodeCat19:01, 7 August 2015

None that I'm aware of.

I'll let you know if I come across anything.

Thanks.

Espreon (talk)19:03, 7 August 2015

So would it be safe to simply add a rule to replace -e with -os for all masculine words?

CodeCat19:05, 7 August 2015
 
 
 
 
 

Telugu lists

I have developed some lists in Telugu language: Template:list:days of the week/te; Template:list:continents/te. I have created Template:list:religions/te. Can you check them whether I have done it properly. Thanks.Rajasekhar1961 (talk) 13:45, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Rajasekhar1961 (talk)13:45, 5 August 2015

It looks ok.

CodeCat13:46, 5 August 2015
 

κυκλῶν

Is the deletion of κυκλῶν intentional? It does not seem accurate to say that "No usable content given".

Dan Polansky (talk)23:12, 3 August 2015

I have no idea what the form is. Nothing in the entry tells me.

CodeCat23:16, 3 August 2015

The entry said it was an inflected form and pointed to the lemma. And there is a discussion about this in Wiktionary:Requests for deletion/Others#Template:inflected form of where I do not see a consensus for CodeCat's proposed deletion of the template. I don't know what to say not to repeat myself; something about consensus, its lack, changes made without it, and so on.

Dan Polansky (talk)23:20, 3 August 2015
 
 

Are the extra A's in the imperfect an error?

WikiTiki8917:59, 31 July 2015

Not if OCS evidence is to be believed.

CodeCat18:08, 31 July 2015

Just wondering. They do look like errors, though. Nowhere else do you find double A's in Slavic languages. Is it possible they were pronounced -aja-?

WikiTiki8918:31, 31 July 2015

This is one of the great mysteries of Slavic linguistics...

CodeCat18:46, 31 July 2015

So is OCS the only language they are attested in?

WikiTiki8918:48, 31 July 2015

Maybe East Slavic too, I don't know. The modern Bulgarian imperfect has just a single vowel.

CodeCat19:30, 31 July 2015
 
 
 
 
 

I've sort of reverted your edit on "Stoppel", except that I put the Latin more towards the front as you had done.

Firstly, it was not correct to say "the High German form was Middle High German stupfel", because Central German is also High German, and it uses "Stoppel".

Secondly, in modern German -- which is not a standardized dialect, but an artificial amalgam of dialects -- we very often have the case that a word comes out with a certain consonantal "irregularity" in comparison to the Upper German-based MHG. But while this is so, it's still essentially the same word and thus a native one. Because the forms Stupfel, Stopfel, Stuppel, Stoppel were all around for some while, written, read, and reproduced, and eventually Stoppel happened to become standardized.

I've been working on these "irregular" consonantisms more or less systematically for some while, and thus far I have chosen to give the MHG-OHG lineage, and then explain the specific form according to its dialectal background (usually that is Central and/or Low German). This is also what the etymological dictionaries do in many or most cases. Thereby, I treat the word as being derived both from Middle High German and Middle Low German, not as a borrowing from the latter.

I only do this in cases where the identity of different dialectal forms was obvious to writers in the formative period of modern German, who were generally quite aware of the dialectal differences. I wouldn't do it if two stems happened to be cognates, but the identity wasn't obvious (because maybe the word had become archaic in Upper German, or the Low German form was just too different). All of this, of course, based on the standard literature.

You don't need to answer, unless you disagree with this practice.

Kolmiel (talk)17:05, 8 June 2015

What I don't agree with is saying that the word comes from MHG "stupfel". That's just clearly wrong.

CodeCat17:06, 8 June 2015

Sorry. This was ages ago, but I somehow hadn't seen your answer. I see your point. But I don't quite agree. Saying that modern "Stoppel" is from MHG "stupfel" doesn't mean that it directly developed out of this particular form. And this miscomprehension is ruled out by the following explanation, namely that the consonantism is northern.

What is meant is that "stupfel" was the MHG standard form -- MHG being very much a standardized language, by the scale of the time -- and that "Stoppel" is the continuation of this MHG word, even if its form has been influenced by northern dialects. Take Hafer. The word is a continuation of MHG haber even if its form has been influenced by Low German haver. A minor formal change in a word doesn't make it a completely different word that loses all connections with the MHG antecessor.

That's my point of view. But I think a compromise would be to say: from MHG stupfel, *stuppel, from OHG stuphila, *stuppila. So that's what I'll write.

Kolmiel (talk)14:07, 30 July 2015
 
 
First page
First page
Previous page
Previous page
Last page
Last page