Wiktionary:Requests for verification/Non-English
| Wiktionary Request pages (edit) see also: discussions | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Requests for verification
Requests for verification in the form of durably-archived attestations conveying the meaning of the term in question.
|
Requests for deletion
Requests for deletion of pages in the main and Reconstruction namespace due to policy violations; also for undeletion requests.
|
Requests for deletion/Others add new request | history Requests for deletion and undeletion of pages in other namespaces, such as appendices, templates and modules.
|
Language treatment requests add new request | history Requests for changes to Wiktionary's language treatment practices, including renames, mergers and splits.
| ||
| Requests for moves, mergers and splits add new request | history | archives Discussion of proposed moves, mergers and splits of entries or other pages.
|
Category and label treatment requests add new request | history Requests for changes to Wiktionary's categories or labels, including additions, deletions, renames, mergers and splits.
| ||||
| Requests for cleanup add new request | history | archives Cleanup requests, questions and discussions.
| |||||
|
| |||||
| All Wiktionary: namespace discussions 1 2 3 4 5 - All discussion pages 1 2 3 4 5 |
This page is for verification of entries in any language for which there is no specialised RFV page according to this list:
- English, Middle English, Scots, Yola and Fingallian → Wiktionary:Requests for verification/English
- Chinese, Japanese, Korean → Wiktionary:Requests for verification/CJK
- Italic (Latin or Romance languages) → Wiktionary:Requests for verification/Italic
- Reconstructed languages → Wiktionary:Requests for deletion/Reconstruction
- All other languages → this page
Scope of this request page:
- In-scope: terms to be attested by providing quotations of their use
- Out-of-scope: terms suspected to be multi-word sums of their parts such as “green leaf”
Templates:
{{rfv}}{{rfv-sense}}{{archive-top|rfv}}+{{archive-bottom}}
Shortcut:
See also:
- Criteria for inclusion
- Format for citations
- Standard entry layout
- A list of searchable external archives, useful for finding durably-archived media to quote.
Overview: This page is for disputing the existence of terms or senses. It is for requests for attestation of a term or a sense, leading to deletion of the term or a sense unless an editor proves that the disputed term or sense meets the attestation criterion as specified in Criteria for inclusion, usually by providing citations from three durably archived sources. Requests for deletion based on the claim that the term or sense is nonidiomatic or “sum of parts” should be posted to Wiktionary:Requests for deletion. Requests to confirm that a certain etymology is correct should go in the Etymology scriptorium, and requests to confirm pronunciation is correct should go in the Tea Room.
Adding a request: To add a request for verification (attestation), add the template {{rfv}} or {{rfv-sense}} to the questioned entry, and then make a new section here. Those who would seek attestation after the term or sense is nominated will appreciate your doing at least a cursory check for such attestation before nominating it: Google Books is a good place to check, others are listed here (WT:SEA).
Answering a request by providing an attestation: To attest a disputed term, i.e. prove that the term is actually used and satisfies the requirement of attestation as specified in inclusion criteria, do one of the following:
- Assert that the term is in clearly widespread use. (If this assertion is not obviously correct, or is challenged by multiple editors, it will likely be ignored, necessitating the following step.)
- Cite, on the article page, usage of the word in permanently recorded media, conveying meaning, in at least three independent instances spanning at least a year. (Many languages are subject to other requirements; see WT:CFI.)
In any case, advise on this page that you have placed the citations on the entry page.
Recording negative findings: Editors who make a fair effort to find citations but fail to do so should state their negative result on this page (even if it only repeats another editor's negative result).
Closing a request: After a discussion has sat for more than a month without being “cited”, or after a discussion has been “cited” for more than a week without challenge, the discussion may be closed. Closing a discussion normally consists of the following actions:
- Deleting or removing the entry or sense (if it failed), or de-tagging it (if it passed). In either case, the edit summary or deletion summary should indicate what is happening.
- Adding a comment to the discussion here with either RFV-failed or RFV-passed (emboldened), indicating what action was taken. This makes automatic archiving possible. Some editors strike out the discussion header at this time.
In some cases, the disposition is more complicated than simply “RFV-failed” or “RFV-passed”; for example, two senses may have been nominated, of which only one was cited (in which case indicate which one passed and which one failed), or the sense initially RFVed may have been replaced with something else (some editors use RFV-resolved for such situations).
Archiving a request: At least a week after a request has been closed, if no one has objected to its disposition, the request should be archived to the entry's talk page. This is usually done using the aWa gadget, which can be enabled at WT:PREFS.
You can subscribe to a web feed of this page in either RSS or Atom format.
December 2020
[edit]Jeju terms for modern concepts
[edit]As categorized by UNESCO and as discussed in Wikipedia, fluent speakers of the actual Jeju language were all born in the 1940s or earlier. The following terms relating to modern concepts are not likely to be found in traditional Jeju, which was spoken solely by impoverished peasants. As what is now spoken in Jeju Island—an indubitably Korean dialect—is not what we mean by Jeju in Wiktionary, I believe these entries should all be deleted unless someone can provide an actual early attestation (preferably from the very first academic studies of the dialect, in the 1960s). The Digital Museum for Endangered Languages and Cultures or the NIKL dictionaries ported at Urimalsaem is not necessarily reliable in this regard, since they do not really make this distinction.
Making the distinction between traditional, soon-to-be-extinct Jeju and Category:Jeju Korean is crucial for maintaining some integrity in Category:Jeju lemmas. The most credible dictionary of Jeju, 개정증보제주어사전, does not bother with these modernisms and I believe we should follow their lead. — This unsigned comment was added by Karaeng Matoaya (talk • contribs) at 19:58, 5 December 2020 (UTC).
- To anyone who's going through these, please do not delete them for now, as I'm finding cites and am planning on making a complete update soon, but have been behind recently. Thanks! AG202 (talk) 07:43, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
- I know that your opinions have changed a lot since this comment and that we've been able to find a TON of material made in Jeju, so I don't fault you at all for making them at the time. Since the start of the revitalization efforts, there have been more materials being made in native Jeju by Jeju natives (and not in 제주 사투리) and more lexicons being made, so I don't necessarily agree with saying that everything must be from pre-1960, as even if the only Jeju speakers were born in the 1940s or earlier (there are younger Jeju natives but they're more rare), they'd still be able to make up new terms for things that have come into play since then. However, I have deleted the senses that I am completely unable to find and don't think that I will find, per the RFV guidelines. Additionally, the cites that I have found have been written by-and-large in native Jeju and not Jeju-tinged Korean, by or the with consultation of native Jeju speakers and have been published either by the Jeju Preservation Society, the Jeju Provincial Government, or in related Jeju studies. AG202 (talk) 00:03, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
"Camera".
RFV-failed. TranqyPoo (talk) 01:42, 26 June 2025 (UTC)
Cited AG202 (talk) 07:35, 23 October 2025 (UTC)
"Electric fan". Electric fans were not common in South Korea until the 1980s.
RFV-failed. TranqyPoo (talk) 01:42, 26 June 2025 (UTC)
Cited AG202 (talk) 07:35, 23 October 2025 (UTC)
"Demon, Devil". Has Christian connotations to me as a native speaker of Korean, and not found in 제주도무속자료사전 or other sources on Jeju religion; the very concept is alien to Jeju religious practice. Likely a late Christian introduction; the date is unknown, but Christianity was very marginal in Jeju until the 1950s and is still not particularly important there. If it fails RFV, should be changed to the Korean header with {{lb|ko|Jeju}}.
RFV-failed. TranqyPoo (talk) 01:42, 26 June 2025 (UTC)
Cited AG202 (talk) 07:35, 23 October 2025 (UTC)
A modern historiographical term that could not have existed before the 1950s.
RFV-failed. TranqyPoo (talk) 01:42, 26 June 2025 (UTC)
"Main character; protagonist" in the modern literary sense, probably from Japanese.
RFV-failed. TranqyPoo (talk) 01:42, 26 June 2025 (UTC)
"Wind power plant".
RFV-failed. TranqyPoo (talk) 01:42, 26 June 2025 (UTC)
Reopening all. I apologize that it's taken this long, but as the only person who works on Jeju, I am still working on these RFVs, albeit much more passively. Please do not delete these entries or mark them as closed until I have properly gone through them, as I've previously stated. AG202 (talk) 04:34, 26 June 2025 (UTC)
- It has been almost five years since these were nominated. RFVs without citations can be closed after 30 days. I think these should be closed, and if you eventually find citations, the entries can be recreated. —Granger (talk · contribs) 12:31, 22 September 2025 (UTC)
- I am the only one working on Jeju citations, I would rather not have to recreate them. However, I'll give myself a month from today to get them done; if not, they can be deleted. AG202 (talk) 12:37, 22 September 2025 (UTC)
Dutch. These seem unattestable. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk) 15:33, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
- I'm not sure how chemical CFI works, but compounds with decyl: N,N'-bis(10-(p- methoxyfenoxy)-decyl)-p-diaminobenzeen, di(n-hexyl,n-octyl,n-decyl)ftalaat decyl-trimethylammonium, plain decyl: [3]. Thadh (talk) 18:18, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
- That is a systematic name but has Dutch spelling of components, benzeen instead of benzene, etc. A paper from 2009 talks about chemistry translation: doi:10.1021/ci800243w. I think di(n-hexyl,n-octyl,n-decyl)ftalaat appearing in a Dutch paper can be used to support decyl, octyl, and ftalaat (= phthalate, I assume). Vox Sciurorum (talk) 19:08, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
- Pinging potentially interested parties for input: @Lingo Bingo Dingo, Thadh, Vox Sciurorum. The following is research used to help determine CFI:
- (Vote) CFI for academic journals > Removed academic journals from 'exclusion criteria'. In this case, it must convey meaning.
- WT:CHEM requires chemical formulae attestation outside of scientific/technical publications. The vote's rationale states "although many dictionaries cover at least some chemical formulae, no general-interest reference work would cover the millions that exist. The idea is that the rule will still allow the inclusion of chemical formulae that are in common use in publications written for a general audience." I understand this to mean that we should only attest terms if the general population could come across it. carbon only has quotations from general publications.
- These terms can function much like prefixes and suffixes. It is satisfactory to attest prefixes/suffixes if they are part of other words, such as Esperanto's -ujo and English's ex-
- I am not an expert in Dutch or chemistry. However, based on these findings, I conclude that the citations listed in this discussion do not meet CFI due to lack of conveying meaning. I recommend if one opposes based on belief and not on policy, then to engage this discussion at the Wiktionary:Beer_parlour. Leaving the discussion open for challenge. TranqyPoo (talk) 00:23, 27 June 2025 (UTC)
- RFV failed on both entries. — Mnemosientje (t · c) 13:40, 2 December 2025 (UTC)
February 2021
[edit]Translingual. Looks English, see also -s, also as there are non-English translations. --幽霊四 (talk) 01:20, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- 幽霊四: If it “looks English” then spare us such requests and move to English. Nothing would get lost. Fay Freak (talk) 15:01, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- It's an English plural noun. The taxonomic clade is Eudicots. SemperBlotto (talk) 19:11, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
- I would add a request for Translingual Eudicots as well, with the same reasoning.
- [4] has "der Eudicots" (gen. pl., gender not revealed) and "die core eudicots" (pl., same; with italics), but it's just one source, not sufficent.
- [5] has "Der Name Eudicotyledonae (engl. eudicots)", giving two reasons why it doesn't look translingual: 1. It's English. 2. There's an alternative.
- [6] has it in French, but with quotation marks and also "higher hamamelids" (with quotation marks as well) which is even more English.
- [7] has "Les Eudicotylédones (Eudicots)", "des Eudicots", "Les Rosidées". Could also be regular French (-s), or not?
- --幽霊四 (talk) 19:40, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
- It intuitively doesn't feel like a translingual taxonomic name, since it's not Latin. But maybe there are exceptions. I don't know enough to say for sure. @Chuck Entz and @DCDuring, experts on taxonomy. 70.172.194.25 08:52, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- I'm not an expert, but in the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king. It's tricky, because it isn't part of the standard Latin-based Linnaean nomenclature. The Angiosperm Phylogeny Group uses English in the names for their taxonomic entities rather than Latin, and they're more interested in the tree structure than in assigning standard names for every rank- but they're describing things that don't have a name otherwise. I would call the result a parallel, unofficial naming system, but it's used in multiple languages, which makes it translingual. It's not the system for taxonomic nomenclature, but it has its role. Chuck Entz (talk) 16:46, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- It functions just the way the officially (ICZN, ICTV, LPSN, etc) sanctioned taxa do, as lamiids, rosids, eurosids, and a score or more of other APG clade names. It is neither here nor there, but I "feel" it to be a formal taxonomic name, as much as, say, the names of species of viruses (eg, Human alphaherpesvirus 1, which looks like a normal English NP, with an English adjective preceding the head). DCDuring (talk) 16:52, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- It intuitively doesn't feel like a translingual taxonomic name, since it's not Latin. But maybe there are exceptions. I don't know enough to say for sure. @Chuck Entz and @DCDuring, experts on taxonomy. 70.172.194.25 08:52, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
- I would add a request for Translingual Eudicots as well, with the same reasoning.
RFV-failed. Last updated 2 years ago; cleaning up WT:RFVN. No citations provided that meet WT:CFI for eudicots. According to WT:AMUL, citations under Translingual can be from any language. It does not specify whether each citation must be a separate language from other citations. If you want to dispute whether it belongs under Translingual, please make a post in WT:RFM or WT:RFD. Otherwise, please provide citations before archival. TranqyPoo (talk) 00:25, 28 June 2025 (UTC)
- This link should be enough to show this is not just English. I generally don't get into the typing up of citations, but they're out there. Chuck Entz (talk) 02:02, 28 June 2025 (UTC)
- Also Russian and German. Chuck Entz (talk) 02:39, 28 June 2025 (UTC)
- Two of the citations linked refer to Eudicots. I believe the previous comments indicate to assign those to Eudicots, not eudicots. The other is a section title, which I don't think that meets WT:CFI's conveying meaning clause (please inform me if it does, I'm still learning). To me, the majority of this discussion seems like a WT:RFM request. TranqyPoo (talk) 12:59, 29 June 2025 (UTC)
- If deleted, it will be a triumph of form over substance. DCDuring (talk) 15:04, 29 June 2025 (UTC)
- Two of the citations linked refer to Eudicots. I believe the previous comments indicate to assign those to Eudicots, not eudicots. The other is a section title, which I don't think that meets WT:CFI's conveying meaning clause (please inform me if it does, I'm still learning). To me, the majority of this discussion seems like a WT:RFM request. TranqyPoo (talk) 12:59, 29 June 2025 (UTC)
- Also Russian and German. Chuck Entz (talk) 02:39, 28 June 2025 (UTC)
Serbo-Croatian entries by Lumbardhia
[edit]See Talk:štaljba, Wiktionary:Requests for verification/Non-English#štaljba. — surjection ⟨??⟩ 13:41, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
- @Surjection:
- bàrzilo is already said in the first volume of
{{R:sh:RJA}}to occur only in Vuk Karadžić’s dictionary, it is an occasional formation along with barzeša, barzica, barzulijca, and should be deleted. I have added the better-used base adjectives to bardhë which should suffice. - brdoka as well as bardoka have allegedly been used in Kosovo, but it is too specific to be found.
- kàluša is used here and there defined: Kaluša redovno ima veću pegu i na telu, najčešće na grudima, na trbuhu, na sapima u blizini korena repa, tamne noge do kolena i skočnog zgloba ili su noge poprskane pegama kao i kod ostalih domaćih pramenki. The bibliographic information and digitization status of these works is insufficient for me to format quotes.
- lakora I do not find at all.
- kȃrpa are hard to search but are attested, given quotes in Речник српскохрватског књижевног и народног језика, in the ends, where it is continued in better known Macedonian карпа (karpa) and Bulgarian карпа (karpa). The etymology is more doubtful than its existence.
- strȕga has many attestations, e.g. quoted in
{{R:sh:RSHKJ|page=37a|volume=6}}. - diza, dročka, hira are too hard, specific cheese manufacturing terms it seems, with much homonymy, so one can’t try too much. tȇša I see related by mentions in Vanja Stanišić’s book Serbo-Albanian language relations page 106 as a rather recent word but used by Albanians only in few places, so it is not worth it.
- drȅteza only in works discussing Albanian words in Serbo-Croatian, and again from Vuk Karadžić.
- šȍtka was the normal word for duck in some spots of Serbia, a whole isogloss but rural enough to escape the purview of the written language, however surely attested; I have added one quote from a Croatian who wrote a lot and probably picked it up there.
- frȗs is mostly known from Vuk Karadžić’s dictionary, where it is given as Montenegrin – from a time when Montenegro was a bunch of mountain shepherds barely anybody of whom could read and write; however you find фрус in brackets after добрац (“measles”), which looks like some Serbian doctors knew that it is called so in Montenegro. With the advancement of medicine, a lot of disease names have vanished, as is a common experience if you deal with them in any language. Evidently, the word must be labelled “obsolete”.
- So, after four hours for this list, I am positive about the nature of šȍtka, kàluša, kȃrpa, frȗs, strȕga, the rest falls through the sieve for this decade. Fay Freak (talk) 01:41, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
- Here, on the other hand, I repeat my opinion of one year ago: I don’t think Lumbardhia made anything up, or intended to do so—while Surjection’s general suspicion of agents of the Albanian cause introducing fakes seems to be true, as there must be the liars somewhere and Albanians are known as deranged due to their recent history—, but these words are all traceable to dialectological literature, and to the extent I have outlined that one day one year ago the words are found in literature. Fay Freak (talk) 04:08, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
- After many years, deleted the ones not considered likely. The others still need quotes. — SURJECTION / T / C / L / 08:37, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Re-added {{rfv}} to the following terms: struga, šotka. As stated by User:Surjection, please add citations to meet WT:CFI. Serbo-Croatian is one of the WT:WDL. From WT:ASH: "All words which meet Wiktionary's general criteria for inclusion are allowed, regardless of which dialect or subdialect/standard variety they are used in." TranqyPoo (talk) 00:49, 4 July 2025 (UTC)
- @TranqyPoo: This does not in turn mean that others are disallowed, or there are no special inclusion criteria for dialect or historical nonstandard varieties, e contrario indeed this implies some relaxation; by systematic interpretation of WT:WDL well-attestedness can only start to the time and to the extent when literacy pervaded a language community: As say Persian is included there even though printing books started long after 1800, while Arabic is explicitly subjected only as Modern Standard Arabic. Even in literalist understanding of Wiktionary:Criteria for inclusion#Number of citations, the languages in WT:WDL are not meant in toto but in general.
- Also struga is already securely cited even if the cites are not in the entry. Above I gave the reference including verbatim quotes. You should respect that it already took hours to work through such a long list.
- The cites only need to exist, they need not to be easily found by us or at all; nothing in the CFI says quotes must be published, they can be secret military maps or other offline archives in remote places, the content of which can be concluded or transmitted by enquiries. So there must be reliable witness of a word's use, not just a list of proposals, as per the use—mention distinction.
- Another point is that you should not make Wiktionary depend on Google’s database; to date we still cannot find the Macedonian word for North Macedonian after the country's renaming. It’s “unattested”, but I don't RFV because this is trolling, hence we see that we just be sure what entries are true; which causes you to doubt the philological status of šotka? → Wikipedia:Ignore all rules, in particular on Wiktionary when the language science has already been served.
- You re-adding RFVs because “the discussion is still ongoing” is disingenuous. Over this decade I have not seen people adding Serbo-Croatian systematically, let alone quoting it, but incidentally when adding related terms; will we delete everything RFVed because nobody is there? Or will we keep RFVs forever? That's why I rough-handled the list.
- Due to corpus limitations and the habitual userbase as the bottlenecks enabling us to add content, and comprehensive coverage of the obvious coverage gaps in major languages on the other hand, there has been little reason to assume that three quotes are currently expected in most foreign languages other than English, even if they are listed in WT:WDL. I may even contend that Wiktionary:Criteria for inclusion#Number of citations in combination with WT:WDL is now largely ineffective, interpreted properly. You read and apply it incorrectly and against the rules (
we intend to include all words …
). Fay Freak (talk) 16:34, 4 July 2025 (UTC)- @Fay Freak: I will attempt to address your points in a systematic fashion. Please let me know if I misinterpret them, as I will approach it with the principle of charity.
- 1. "Even in literalist understanding of Wiktionary:Criteria for inclusion#Number of citations, the languages in WT:WDL are not meant in toto but in general." | From that reference states "For languages well documented on the Internet, three citations in which a term is used is the minimum number for inclusion in Wiktionary". From a literalist's perspective, this statement would be interpreted as a must, instead of should. Using is without any further clarification speaks universally, not generally. Since Serbo-Croatian is considered one of the WT:WDL, this rule applies. If you disagree, please state so with references for evidence. If you do not believe that Serbo-Croatian should be listed as one of the WT:WDL or there should be further clarification on its attestation standards, I recommend consulting the Beer Parlor.
- 2. "Also struga is already securely cited even if the cites are not in the entry." | As stated here, one must add the citation to the entry in order for it to be attested. There is no clarification that indicates it is a general rule (except for if the language has different WT:CFI requirements), so it is interpreted as a universal statement. I am not discrediting the length in time it took to find citations. However, from my perspective (a person trying to clean up WT:RFVN IAW policies and guidelines), there isn't enough citations to meet WT:CFI. Please provide references that I may be lacking, so that I can be a more educated editor.
- 3. "The cites only need to exist, they need not to be easily found by us or at all" | I agree with this statement. Originally, I understood WT:" as it needing the text of the citation, but nowhere states that it is required. Only words like ideally, should be, in general. It brings up a good question: Do citations require the text to meet WT:CFI? Can they simply just refer to the source without a passage? I think I'll take this to the Beer Parlor if you think not. Additionally, you may argue its obsolete label. However, according to obsolete guidelines, it is still subject to the WT:CFI requirements. Unless you are claiming this word is considered part of an extinct language, it still must have three citations.
- 4. "which causes you to doubt the philological status of šotka?" | The lack of citations listed in the entry.
- 5. "You re-adding RFVs because “the discussion is still ongoing” is disingenuous" | One should not remove the
{{rfv}}until the RFV discussion is closed, as stated here. I re-added them to the entry just in case another fellow editor looking at the entry could contribute to the discussion, as it is technically still open. Even in the{{rfv}}banner states "do not remove{{rfv}}until the request has been resolved.". No one marked the request as resolved, nor was it mutually agreed. - 6. "I may even contend that Wiktionary:Criteria for inclusion#Number of citations in combination with WT:WDL is now largely ineffective, interpreted properly." | Please do so (preferably using the Beer Parlor) and I will subscribe. I am severely interested in how this place is supposed to work and what others think.
- I find it amusing that you make the claim "I read and apply [the rules] incorrectly and against the rules" and you seem to purposely forget to finish the remaining quote, which is: "include all words in all languages, subject to the following criteria". I understand your frustration as you do not want to lose any work created here. If you want to discuss how Wiktionary should be handled, I would love to take this topic to one of our talk pages. Otherwise, please address my comments above with the proper policies and guidelines linked. TranqyPoo (talk) 21:30, 4 July 2025 (UTC)
- @TranqyPoo: 1. Three is just, as it says, the minimum one, for the regular case; only if the amorphous mass of language is defined, which is according to taste, the must can come into play. But even then the demand is only for uses to have existed; this implies some public process, then again relaxed for the amorphous nature of the concept of a language as a corpus.
- 2. What is written in the presentation of Wiktionary:Requests for verification/Non-English is merely introductory for readers and not voted upon or otherwise generally considered to represent community consensus constituting regulations; an unofficial collage, after multiple splits of the page. It explains how the process would be neat and tidy, an ideal. Yet it is well known that a quote does not need to be on the article page, there is a whole namespace for citations; or sometimes terms are in table or chapter titles and hence too unillustrative though definitely attesting, therefore noted in talks to satisfaction. So there are citations. I cannot provide for your inability or unwillingness to read them after already interpreting the rules explicitly.
- 3. You can have the quotes either finely formatted in the article page, in the citations namespace, in the talk pages for requests (and omitted for said lame title reasons or sometimes political considerations like influencing current elections by including quotes referring to candidates), or as here for some words already printed verbatim in other dictionaries (requiring to mirror would entail resolving their abbreviations at least, even more ideally sighting the original materials, and possibly plagiarization). Often I only add a linked page number as a cite of an edition because typing it off is extra work of choosing the beginning and end of the passage particularly in view of missing punctuation in medieval sources, and we cannot type all scripts and languages equally well.
- 4. You can conjecture the existence of further usage existing for šotka. It is irrational to assume it made up for this occasion; Occam's razor says we see our limited corpus here: certain common things people have used to upload in the last quarter of a century, and OCRed correctly: I have added fully cited Arabic words which had zero web hits, in spite of the web’s thirty years age and the hundreds of millions of speakers (not equalling readers, let alone archivists and online pirates): we are alone.
- 5. I closed the discussion after (and in so far as) I ascertained the veracity of certain terms, which is the intention of the verification process, and for scientific stringency has this fall-back in edge-cases, where it is more likely that a thing existed but we don't directly see as much as would like to, than it being a protologism or ghost-word. You can't generally explain to readers that we know a dialect word even with a clear quote but unfortunately could not point to this knowledge in an entry because it was only one or two uses but not three we could show.
- 6. You put arbitrary formalist emphasis on “there is a [WDL] section → hence three needs to be added if requested” without recognizing the criteria formulation as a manual for editors to avoid mistakes in copying fabricated content—hence in fact the emphasis on the use–mention distinction unknown from other Wiktionaries, but well illustrated by the recurring requests and actions of driveby editors to add their own new words—and manage their limited resources on the other hand (somehow a word must be defined and other Wikimedia projects demarcated). We observe workarounds not documented in the manual. Fay Freak (talk) 22:28, 4 July 2025 (UTC)
I can see him citing Omari's literature. I'm not sure how reliable that book is. Does anyone here have this book for verification? Chihunglu83 (talk) 01:07, 4 July 2025 (UTC)
March 2021
[edit]Arabic. --37.42.165.198 18:40, 10 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Fay Freak: Arabic Wikisource has a work by Ibn Khalawayh called "Kitāb laysa fī kalām al-ʻArab", s:ar:ليس في كلام العرب, and a naive search brought it up. Can you check whether this word is used there in the right sense? If not, do you know where else to find attestation for this? 70.172.194.25 05:44, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- Well, it is given an example of maṣdar with a quote also found in Lisān al-ʕarab the further context of which I see not. Too bad we only know it as a kind of a copypasta. Fay Freak (talk) 06:37, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- While Modern Standard Arabic is a well-documented language and therefore subject to stricter attestation rules, according to my understanding Classical Arabic is exempt. So, under the more lenient standards, this could probably pass, but that would require someone to actually add the quote from Ibn Manzur and/or Ibn Khalawayh to the entry, and maybe to label the term as classical/archaic/rare if applicable. 70.172.194.25 08:16, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
- Well, it is given an example of maṣdar with a quote also found in Lisān al-ʕarab the further context of which I see not. Too bad we only know it as a kind of a copypasta. Fay Freak (talk) 06:37, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
RFV-failed. Cleaning up WT:RFVN, last updated 2 years ago. No citations added to the entry. There is a claim that the term is possibly Classical Arabic, which could lessen attestation requirements. Please provide objections or add citations to the entry before archival. TranqyPoo (talk) 01:01, 4 July 2025 (UTC)
April 2021
[edit]Dutch. Another unattested diminutive. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk) 10:00, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
- This one is attestable, but only in a few tweets, which are not durably archived. 70.172.194.25 05:49, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
RFV-failed. Cleaning up [[WT:RFVN], last updated 2 years ago. No citations in entry. TranqyPoo (talk) 01:12, 4 July 2025 (UTC)
And another one. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk) 10:31, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
- I can confirm that this seems unattestable, even online. 70.172.194.25 05:46, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
Added missing {{rfv}}. TranqyPoo (talk) 01:12, 4 July 2025 (UTC)
And another one. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk) 10:33, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
- I can confirm that this seems unattestable, even online. 70.172.194.25 05:46, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
Hi LBD, as there's no Wiktionary policy on regular diminutives in Dutch (should we always include them as they help users form the diminutive, or should we only include them if they have three durable attestations?). I would honestly not pursue a verification & deletion campaign. I don't see any value in this at all, and it may siphon time away from real things to improve. Morgengave (talk) 13:26, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
- WT:CFI -> 3 cites. Diminutives aren't even inflected forms, but derived terms. Also, for dubious inflected forms there could be RFVs as well, e.g. for plurals when the term is (thought to be) singular only, uncountable. — This unsigned comment was added by 2003:de:371c:3d29:91e2:2f43:c6bd:d627 (talk) at 15:19, 3 April 2021.
- The point is that any Dutch user at any time can apply such a regular diminutive - usage would be considered correct and unremarkable. These are not dubious grammatically - there are just so many nouns in Dutch that not for every noun, you can find durable attestations of their regular diminutives. This also means that at any moment in time such an unattested diminutive can "appear" in newspapers and books, making these deletions likely temporary anyway. This is not the case for uncountable words - a plural here would just sound wrong. I won't oppose the verification-to-deletion process of these diminutives btw; I just find it a waste of time. Morgengave (talk) 16:15, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
- @Morgengave What I like about the English Wiktionary is that it is a very empirical dictionary. Removing entries for unattested diminutives would make our Dutch coverage more empirical and prevent shitty mirror sites from spreading misinformation. Moreover, the view that unattested diminutives qualify for inclusion is not uncontroversial outside the Dutch-language editor base, though I do not presume to know what the majority view is. I can agree to displaying unattested diminutives, but woudl rather not agree to linking to them.
←₰-→Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk) 15:58, 3 April 2021 (UTC)- I respect that pov. I never create unattested diminutives myself, and generally (following our chat) even follow your way of working of not even displaying unattested diminutives in new lemmas (so that no red link appears). But deleting existing entries just seems pointless. These diminutives are not wrong in any shape or form. Morgengave (talk) 16:15, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
- Late to this party, but I agree these make no sense and should go if they don't meet our attestation criteria. That said, I also agree with Morgengave that while they should go if challenged and no proof is given, and that patently bizarre diminutives probably shouldn't be linked in the headword to begin with so as to discourage their creation, I don't think a big campaign to weed out pointless diminutive entries is a priority. — Mnemosientje (t · c) 11:00, 14 April 2025 (UTC)
- I respect that pov. I never create unattested diminutives myself, and generally (following our chat) even follow your way of working of not even displaying unattested diminutives in new lemmas (so that no red link appears). But deleting existing entries just seems pointless. These diminutives are not wrong in any shape or form. Morgengave (talk) 16:15, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
@Lingo Bingo Dingo, why aren’t diminutives inflected forms? MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 08:26, 22 July 2022 (UTC)
- Because that's not what inflection means. These diminutives generally even have different grammatical genders than the words they are based on. For all other languages except Dutch, we consider nouns formed by attaching a diminutive suffix to be a separate lemma. For the -je / -ke family of Dutch diminutives we (debatably but understandably) don't list them as lemmas pretty much because of the reasons listed by Morgengave above, but that doesn't make them inflected forms. — Mnemosientje (t · c) 11:00, 14 April 2025 (UTC)
Added missing {{rfv}}. TranqyPoo (talk) 01:12, 4 July 2025 (UTC)
- RFV failed on the three of them. — Mnemosientje (t · c) 14:15, 2 December 2025 (UTC)
Arabic. Rfv-sense: "(collective) the typically sweet- or (less commonly) sour-tasting produce of plants, fruit, fruitage" --5.245.69.225 02:57, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
- Searching on Google appears to yield many results of modern-style writings (that is, ones that might be dismissed as solecisms). There are, nevertheless, a few medieval-style results like this one that seem to capture the meaning of "fleshy plant products". Modern Standard Arabic occurrences though are far more frequent in this sense. Roger.M.Williams (talk) 19:00, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
- @Roger.M.Williams: Fix your link! I abstain from this issue, dealing with so microscopic a sense distinction. If you see such senses then it is perhaps you who could … ehm add at least one clear quotation. If it’s from the web maybe an occurrence by an image makes it clear. Fay Freak (talk) 22:15, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
RFV-failed. Cleaning up WT:RFVN, last updated 2 years ago. No citations linked to entry. Please provide objections or add citations to the entry to meet WT:CFI before archival. TranqyPoo (talk) 01:21, 4 July 2025 (UTC)
June 2021
[edit]Old High German: “female genitalia”. Tagged by 88.64.225.1 on 26 June 2021, not listed:
- “It's possible, but the form would obviously be irregular in High German. As of now it is not given in the Althochdeutsches Wörterbuch. The source is not scientific and it doesn't strictly say that the word is High German. It only says that it was found by a contributor to the Althochdeutsches Wörterbuch, which doesn't rule out that the gloss may be Old Saxon or Low Franconian.”
J3133 (talk) 16:29, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
- Well, the word is given as an example of a German word and attestation in an Old Dutch work is particularly unlikely, so the real problems are the apparently irregular form and the fact that this is a rather unusual source.
←₰-→Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk) 16:56, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
- Source has:
- "Zahlreiche deutsche Wörter aus dem achten bis zehnten Jahrhundert sind nur als Anmerkungen und Übersetzungshilfen am Rand oder zwischen den Zeilen lateinischer Texte überliefert. Tausende dieser sogenannten Glossen wurden erst in letzter Zeit entdeckt und untersucht. Zu ihnen gehört „cunta“, eine vulgäre Bezeichnung für das weibliche Sexualorgan, die als Übersetzung von „pudenda“ am Rand einer kirchengeschichtlichen Handschrift des neunten Jahrhunderts auftauchte."
- It's only saying "German", and doesn't clarify whether it's "High German" or "High and Low German". And if it's the latter, it's open whether Low German would be "Old Saxon" or "Low Franconian and Old Saxon". Also as it's only a gloss: If there are no other glosses near to it with clear Low or High German features, who knows what language the gloss is in? --16:04, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
July 2021
[edit]Dutch. Typically written as two words, it turned out harder to cite than I thought it would be. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk) 10:45, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
- [8], [9], [10], [11], [12] (some of these might not be durably archived) Thadh (talk) 13:36, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
- RFV passed, I added a bunch of citations. It's easy to attest using newspapers. — Mnemosientje (t · c) 14:16, 2 December 2025 (UTC)
August 2021
[edit]Dutch. Tagged by User:Lingo Bingo Dingo, but not listed — surjection ⟨??⟩ 08:48, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
- DWB 2 mentions: "mnl. nnl. erbieden". (BTW: Luxemburgish, Ripuarian MHG.) --19:07, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
- WNT has two citations of the verbal noun erbieding from 1642, marking the verb as verouderd (“obsolete”). --Lambiam 08:58, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
- I was probably curious whether this could be cited as Dutch or as Dutch Low Saxon/Low German, the latter of which corresponds to the local lects in the eastern Netherlands. The er- prefix is also very rare and unproductive in actual Dutch.
←₰-→Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk) 08:33, 22 August 2021 (UTC) - RFV failed. — Mnemosientje (t · c) 13:40, 2 December 2025 (UTC)
This is Round 2 relating to History assassination fraud problemတလိုင်း တႆးလႅင်.
I am challenging the meaning 'Tai Laing'; the previous discussion established the meaning as 'Mon', but we are now facing an edit war over the meaning. It's conceivable that the word has had both meanings, but I see no evidence of the meaning 'Tai Laing' being used in Burmese. Moreover, 'Tai Laing' shows every appearance of being an autonym, though I don't know how seriously we should take the claim that they are a branch of the Tai Daeng of Vietnam. --RichardW57 (talk) 22:20, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
- I don't see that the previous discussion established that; the only evidence pasted directly into the thread (by someone who didn't sign their post) was Judson's Burmese-English Dictionary, which has "တလိုင်း, n. a Peguan Talaing, [..]" (a dictionary being enough for a LDL). I've tagged the "Mon" sense with RFV, too, so both senses are now tagged: let there be citations/references added to the entry for whichever one(s) are attested (I added the reference for the Tai Laing sense). - -sche (discuss) 02:21, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
- Keep 'Mon'. Actually, you added the well-nigh clinching reference for the 'Mon' sense! I can't see which bit of Talaing you didn't understand. I've used the Judson template to link to a later edition of the dictionary. I'm not sure whether to add a mention to complete the definition of Talaing. — This unsigned comment was added by RichardW57 (talk • contribs) at 07:02, 1 September 2021 (UTC).
- It may be worth noting that the Talaing live south of Shan State while the Tai Laing live north of Shan State, in Kachin and points west. --RichardW57 (talk) 07:37, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
- Re "I can't see which bit of Talaing you didn't understand": well, as I don't like to time travel, at the time I commented I c0uldn't see any part of that entry that you created several hours after my comment, but I realize now the Tai Laing and Talaing are distinct. - -sche (discuss) 19:25, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
- @RichardW57,Did you know that Ta Laingတလိုင်း is a hate speech invented by the extremist Dog Burmese people? the fact that you are trying to express the term Ta Laingတလိုင်း, coined by the extremist Dog Burmese people, is a human animal that encourages extremism, if you are trying to express the Ta Laingတလိုင်း term coined by extremist Burmese people, it means that you are also trying to attack the Mon people. I did not believe that you would become an educated animal, if you are a real human being, you will never ruin someone else's history. The fact that you are now fabricating the term Ta Laingတလိုင်း as Mon just shows that you are an extremist terrorist, do you have strong evidence that the term Ta Laingတလိုင်း is Mon? when the Mon people object that the term Ta Laingတလိုင်း is not Mon, you are trying to be Mon is an extremist act, have you received a vote from Mon people to describe the term Ta Laing as Mon? Ta Laingတလိုင်း is an objection because is not Mon. Do not show propaganda books published by extremist Dog Burmese people as evidence of Ta Laing terminology, there are many Ta Laingတလိုင်း related propaganda books published by extremist Dog Burmese people. Those who believe in the propaganda Ta Laing book released by extremist Burmese people are ignorant animals, you should collect votes from Mon people to describe the term Ta Laing as Mon, now you are accusing Ta Laingတလိုင်း of being Mon, this is very rude, if you are a real polite person, you should describe Mon as Mon, you are very rude when you now describe Ta Laingတလိုင်း as Mon.--Music writer Dr.Intobesa of Japanese idol NMB48 and BNK48. (talk) 12:55, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
- The issue of this term being offensive and another term being preferred seems like something to resolve by adding the label "(offensive)" or "(now offensive)"; also, we should expand the etymology to note the folk etymological interpretation which has led to it being considered offensive. But apparently the sense does exist (in the past) after all. - -sche (discuss) 19:25, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
- I wouldn't be surprised if the term still existed as a way for Burmans to bait Mons. According to WP it still exists in a technical sense for poetry. --RichardW57 (talk) 20:30, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
- The issue of this term being offensive and another term being preferred seems like something to resolve by adding the label "(offensive)" or "(now offensive)"; also, we should expand the etymology to note the folk etymological interpretation which has led to it being considered offensive. But apparently the sense does exist (in the past) after all. - -sche (discuss) 19:25, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
- @RichardW57,Did you know that Ta Laingတလိုင်း is a hate speech invented by the extremist Dog Burmese people? the fact that you are trying to express the term Ta Laingတလိုင်း, coined by the extremist Dog Burmese people, is a human animal that encourages extremism, if you are trying to express the Ta Laingတလိုင်း term coined by extremist Burmese people, it means that you are also trying to attack the Mon people. I did not believe that you would become an educated animal, if you are a real human being, you will never ruin someone else's history. The fact that you are now fabricating the term Ta Laingတလိုင်း as Mon just shows that you are an extremist terrorist, do you have strong evidence that the term Ta Laingတလိုင်း is Mon? when the Mon people object that the term Ta Laingတလိုင်း is not Mon, you are trying to be Mon is an extremist act, have you received a vote from Mon people to describe the term Ta Laing as Mon? Ta Laingတလိုင်း is an objection because is not Mon. Do not show propaganda books published by extremist Dog Burmese people as evidence of Ta Laing terminology, there are many Ta Laingတလိုင်း related propaganda books published by extremist Dog Burmese people. Those who believe in the propaganda Ta Laing book released by extremist Burmese people are ignorant animals, you should collect votes from Mon people to describe the term Ta Laing as Mon, now you are accusing Ta Laingတလိုင်း of being Mon, this is very rude, if you are a real polite person, you should describe Mon as Mon, you are very rude when you now describe Ta Laingတလိုင်း as Mon.--Music writer Dr.Intobesa of Japanese idol NMB48 and BNK48. (talk) 12:55, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
Shans, not just Tai Laing
[edit]Dr Intobesa has given a different account in User_talk:RichardW57#Stop trying to lie တလိုင်း. I think we've been misled because of the development of the Burmese digraph "ui". It seems that the Shans and the Mons became allies in a revolt in 1740 and consequently came to share an appellation. If this story is correct (I've verified none of it as yet), then we can even merge the two 'etymologies'. We still need verification for the initial and linking senses of the word under the new explanation, and the 'synonyms' for Etymology 2 need to be checked. --RichardW57 (talk) 14:42, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
- @RichardW57, Tai Laing is the spelling of ထႆးလႅင်, there are two types of spelling of Shan people. The Shan people use the spelling of the Shan language vocabulary used in English in two different spelling words, ၽႃႇသႃႇတႆးယႂ်ႇ or ၽႃႇသႃႇထႆးယႂ်ႇ, the spelling of the word ၽႃႇသႃႇတႆး was used by the Shan people to mean the whole Shan language. The Burmese people call Thai and Shan is ရှမ်းShan, but in the literature they are divided into Shan, Thai. The Mon people call Thai, Shan, Laos is Siemသေံ, but in the literature they are divided into သေံSiem, သေံဇၞော်Siem Hanok, သေံလဴSiem Lav, see definition below.
- (သေံSiem) definition=Thai
- (သေံဇၞော်Siem Hanok) definition=Shan/ the spelling word Siem Hanok is the same as the Thai spelling ไทยใหญ่Thai Yai.
- (သေံလဴSiem Lav) definition=Laos
The word Tai Laing is probably the pronunciation of ထႆးလႅင်, so it could be Ta Laingတလိုင်း, see also the following explanation for words with the same spelling pronunciation in English, Shan, Thai, Burmese.
- (Shan=ထႆး) (English=Thai) (Thai=ไทย) definition=The (ထႆးThaiไทย) spelling shown here is the same for all pronunciations.
- (Shan=လႅင်) (English=Laing) (Burmese=လိုင်း/example=Ta Laingတလိုင်း) definition=The (လႅင်Laingလိုင်း) spelling shown here is the same for all pronunciations, Shan people can use two spellings ထႆး or တႆး. example=Shan languages can be said to use this ထႆးလႅင် or တႆးလႅင် term, consider the current spelling usage of Shan people in Burma and Shan people in Thailand.
- Shan=(ၽႃႇသႃႇထႆးယႂ်ႇ) English=(Thai Yai language) Thai=(ภาษาไทยใหญ่) definition=(Shan language) explanation=These are the spelling words used by the Shan people in Thailand.
- Shan=(ၽႃႇသႃႇတႆးယႂ်ႇ) English=(Tai Yai language) Thai=(ภาษาไทใหญ่) definition=(Shan language) explanation=These are the spelling words used by the Shan people in Burma. I am a qualified writer in literature, learn the vocabulary spelling that I have explained in detail, I would also like to warn you to avoid accusations that hurt a certain ethnic group on Wiktionary. The Wiktionary is a dictionary website, so only dictionary terms are appropriate, it is totally inappropriate to write accusations that hurt an ethnic group on Wiktionary, thanks.--Music writer Dr.Intobesa of Japanese idol NMB48 and BNK48. (talk) 10:03, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
- And you should be aware of the Shan word တႆးလူင် (I hope I've spelt it right) used for the main Shan group. Unfortunately, I'm having trouble finding it in Thai or Shan script. The literal Thai transliteration would be ไทยหลวง; the form I encounter in English is 'Tai Long' and I can even find a section of the Tai-Lōng Tipiṭaka. — This unsigned comment was added by RichardW57 (talk • contribs) at 20:35, 9 September 2021 (UTC).
- @RichardW57, The term Tai Laing has nothing to do with the term တႆးလူင် and ไทยหลวง, the correct pronunciation of the word ไทยหลวง is Thai Luang. Similarly, the correct pronunciation of the word တႆးလူင် is Tai Luang, the definitions of တႆးလူင်Tai Luang and ไทยหลวงThai Luang are different, check out the following definitions of တႆးလူင်Tai Luang and ไทยหลวงThai Luang.
- (Thai=ไทยหลวง pronunciation=Thai Luang) (Burmese=ထိုင်းတော်ဝင် pronunciation=Thai Taw Win) (English=Thai royal) (other spelling words=Thai=ราชวงศ์ไทย/Burmese=ထိုင်းတော်ဝင်မိသားစု/English=Thai royal family) (definition=The term ไทยหลวงThai Luang and Rachngs Thaiราชวงศ์ไทย means members of the royal family of the King of Thailand.)
- (Shan=တႆးလူင် pronunciation=Tai Luang) (Burmese=ရှမ်းစော်ဘွား pronunciation=Shan Saw Bwar) (English=Shan royal) (another spelling word in Burmese language=Shan Nang Dwinရှမ်းနန်းတွင်း or ရှမ်းနန်းတွင်းသူShan Nang Dwin Thu) (definition=The term တႆးလူင်Tai Luang refers to the ancient Shan King Family.
The words တႆးလူင်Tai Luang and ไทยหลวงThai Luang have similar pronunciations but different meanings, let me give you another example, only ထႆးလူင် should be used for ไทยหลวงThai Luang spelling, I hope you understand what I have just explained.--Music writer Dr.Intobesa of Japanese idol NMB48 and BNK48. (talk) 17:01, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
- There's a discussion of the naming of Tai groups at [13]. As I would hope you know, Shan တႆး (tái), Thai ไทย (tai) and ไท (tai), English Thai, Tai and pinyin Dai are all essentially the same word, but to varying degrees specialised to designate specific groups of speakers. In some Tai dialects (I can confirm it for Northern Thai, i.e. the dialect of Lanna), the cognate of Thai หลวง (lǔuang, “high”) has replaced the cognate of Thai ใหญ่ (yài, “big”) as the usual word for 'big'. As the article says on p27 from journal, northern Shans "เรียก พวกตนเองว่า ไทใหญ่ (Tai Yai) หรือ ไทโหลง (Tai Long) โหลงเป็นคําเดียวกับคําว่าหลวง" (call themselves 'Tai Yai' or 'Tai Long'. 'Long' (โหลง is the word corresponding to the [Thai] word หลวง.)
- It would seem that Thais use ไทโหลง because of the royal meaning of ไทหลวง.
- One can also find the Shans' 'Tai Long' autonym spelt ไตโหลง or ไต๊โหลง in Thai. --RichardW57 (talk) 22:49, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
- What is the "Tai Longတႆးလုင်" you referred to on my user page? --RichardW57 (talk) 22:49, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
- @RichardW57, တႆးလုင်Tai Long is the term တႆးလူင်Tai Luang, the Tai Longတႆးလုင် is a spelling word used by the Khamti people, The တႆးလူင်Tai Luang is a spelling word used by the Shan people.--Music writer Dr.Intobesa of Japanese idol NMB48 and BNK48. (talk) 06:56, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
October 2021
[edit]There is an obsolete meaning "to support a person in the advancement of their career". But the only use of this sense that remains today is sense #3. I would either delete sense #1 completely or change the description to the more general sense I stated above and mark this meaning as obsolete. Berndf (talk) 13:08, 21 March 2025 (UTC)
German. Never heard this one. As far as I know, promovieren is strictly related to a doctorate degree, but the linked sense is clearly more general/broad. Duden, pons, DWDS and de.wikt also don't make any mention of this sense. In case this RFV fails, also remove the translation in promote. --Fytcha (talk) 14:47, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
- The transitive use occurs in the traditional formula conferring the degree, as seen here: „Auf Grund der von Sr. kaiserlichen und apostolisch königlichen Majestät der kön. ung. Tierärztlichen Hochschule allergnädigst gewährten Ermächtigung promoviere ich Sie im Namen des Professorenkörpers dieser Hochschule zum Doktor der veterinärmedizinischen Wissenschaften.“ [14] Here is a more recent, less formal use: ‚Schließen Sie Ihr Studium ab. Dann promoviere ich Sie.‘ [15] --Lambiam 15:44, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
- In both quotes, the verb is used in its third sense: to confer a doctorate. Fytcha (talk) 15:50, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
- Which was, I guess, the intended meaning of sense 1, the only transitive sense listed before you added this third sense. This supposition of mine is supported by the label (education). However, in the second use I cited, it is not fully clear that the promotion is to an academic degree. --Lambiam 09:28, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
- Oh you're right, it is a possibility that this was the intended meaning of sense 1 by the previous editor. To me they are so semantically different (the English explanations, that is) that I didn't think this was what was intended but I can see the connection now.
- The context makes it clear that the second use you've cited is also about an academic degree:
- Was hat Sie dazu bewogen, die Professorinnen-Laufbahn einzuschlagen? - Die Initialzündung dazu hat ein Professor gegeben. Der hat mir noch während des Studiums gesagt: ‚Schließen Sie Ihr Studium ab. Dann promoviere ich Sie.‘ ― What has motivated you to opt for the career path as a professor? - The first impetus was given to me by a professor. Still in my studies he told me: 'Finish your studies. Then I am going to promovieren you.' Fytcha (talk) 12:21, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
- But a professor does not have the power to confer a degree by themselves. The intention may have been, “I’ll be happy to be your PhD adviser”, presumably including an offer of a paid position as doctoral student. Used as such it would be – IMO – an abuse of terminology. --Lambiam 09:54, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
- Which was, I guess, the intended meaning of sense 1, the only transitive sense listed before you added this third sense. This supposition of mine is supported by the label (education). However, in the second use I cited, it is not fully clear that the promotion is to an academic degree. --Lambiam 09:28, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
- In both quotes, the verb is used in its third sense: to confer a doctorate. Fytcha (talk) 15:50, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
- Obviously this was used in the 16–18th centuries just like in Latin, from which the doctorate senses are only particular applications. If you only look at de.Wiktionary, there are three old quotes. Maybe regard less what you have heard and more what was heard in former centuries? I find this usage very natural, however the gloss is wrong, I don’t know what they mean with “promote”, one shouldn’t gloss with just one word or anyone thinks of it what he wants to think of it, it’s actually no meaning at all but an “etymological equivalent”. Fay Freak (talk) 16:25, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
- The sense that I have submitted to RfV is not labeled as (dated) or something comparable, neither is the translation provided in promote that I've made mention of. I find it absurd that you suggest me to regard more what was heard in former centuries when the discussion circles around the modern form of the language. Moreover, I don't think there was anything on my part to explain your gruff tone towards me. Fytcha (talk) 18:36, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Fytcha: You are right, as I said it is badly glossed and labelled, but editors often do not know if something is really not used now and only whether it has been used at all, so you should expect obsolete senses not labelled obsolete, but really, it is kind of easy pickings to conclude that back in the day – in the Baroque style Fruchtbringende Gesellschaft fought against – people just used any sense of the Latin word and then the doctorate sense developed, not just borrowed from Latin discourse. Fay Freak (talk) 19:47, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
- The sense that I have submitted to RfV is not labeled as (dated) or something comparable, neither is the translation provided in promote that I've made mention of. I find it absurd that you suggest me to regard more what was heard in former centuries when the discussion circles around the modern form of the language. Moreover, I don't think there was anything on my part to explain your gruff tone towards me. Fytcha (talk) 18:36, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
- BTW: The examples at de:promovieren are misquoted.
- de.wp: "ein subsidium oder hilff [...] zulassen" – source: "ein ſubſidium oder hilff [...] zůlaſſen" – the Latinate term is set in another front and in zů- there's an small o above the u.
- de.wp: "Bruderschaffe S. Jofephs" – source: "Bruderſchafft S. Joſephs" or simplified "Bruderschafft S. Josephs" – with Bruderschafft (cp. Bruderschaft) and Joseph.
- --Myrelia (talk) 21:06, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
- BTW why don’t you correct the typos, as it is a wiki? You have looked into the scans, so do it. Antiqua in Fraktur though is of course hard to mimick, and no grounds to exclude words, as many words which we needs include, or all wälsch words, were written this way.
- Do not forget to search promoviren for quotes, guys, as this is how the ending used to be written before 1900. Fay Freak (talk) 19:47, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
The given sources are Latin or Greek and have bricumum, βρικίνη (with variants), briginus, none of them has briginos. Thus it's *briginos, reconstructed from Latin/Greek "deformations". Compare how it's also Vandalic eils with alternative form *heils. --Myrelia (talk) 18:47, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
- This is not *briginos, this is briginos. Scholars use to not put a star in front of this term, you are just abusing the terms “reconstructed” and “attested”.
- The given sources being Latin or Greek does not hinder anything, since languages can be attested from mentions. It is no difference whether I put the Latin or Greek texts as collapsible “quotes” or mere ”citations” in a reference section, but the former is more customary for ancient works; yourself you just put Latin quotes in Vandalic entries and German in Old Prussian and the like.
- The exact form is also attested, in the third quote. briginos, written briginus because the author identified the Gaulish ending with the Latin ending, but this does not make it Latin, the quote literally says it is Gaulish. And it is well known that sometimes an exact lemma form is not attested but only “a deformation”, also known as inflection.
- Therefore, this RFV is dismissed.
- It is also dismissed as abusive and futile since we know well that these are all quotes that exist for this word. All quotes are given. Fay Freak (talk) 19:07, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
- Quotes are given, but again: none has briginos. Attested are only briginus etc. (By the quote, βρικίνη however could rather be a Greek than a Gaulish term.) Compare with Vandalic eils vs. *heils, and e.g. Old Prussian wolistian (attested) vs. *āzistin (M. Klussis' (re-)construction), *vɔ̄zistʹan (V. Mažiulis' (re-)construction). --Myrelia (talk) 19:21, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
- No conclusion is made from your comparisons.
- The templates rely on the -os ending.
- The third quote has briginos, as it has briginus. Fay Freak (talk) 19:23, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
- Why this antic anyway of moving to the reconstruction space if it is attested? Something mindboggling for you: The word is attested, but none of its forms are. But the forms of a word do not need to be attested all. None need to be. I have attested the term. This is as much as the CFI require. Fay Freak (talk) 19:27, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
- Wort – Text – Sprache und Kultur has "Gall. *briginos/briginom war mithin schlicht die 'kräftige (i. S. v. sehr wirksame) Pflanze'", with star and two reconstructed forms, and here scholars too use a star. Mithridate / Mithridates (1555) has "Cf. [source], s.v. bricumos, briginos ? «armoise»", with a question mark.
- And BTW: I haven't put any Latin quote in a Vandalic entry. Also not in Old Prussian (Elbing Vocabulary which I cited is in Middle High German and Old Prussian). --Myrelia (talk) 19:21, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
- You are just citing friends who are also unsure how to use the star. Simultaneously you refer to one source which lacks the star, so you see that it is not necessary, only your personal preference. Under some convention the star would be put after the term. On the other hand, often people do not even exactly know how a term is attested, therefore they star forms just to be cautious, without having sighted the loci. But this then does not even tell us whether the term or form is attested, in their view.
- Still you dodge the fact that the CFI do not require particular forms nor spellings to be attested, only terms.
- The term linked in the title is attested, quoted. The form is too, we can well claim. Fay Freak (talk) 20:06, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
- “Attested”, not in the Latin quotation, but in the English translation supplied by you. Is your strike-through of the heading, as if the issue has been resolved other than by a shouting match, not somewhat out-of-process? --Lambiam 19:38, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Lambiam: How pedantic do you want to be? It is attested in the Latin quotation. Lemma-forms aren’t even attested always, what if it is e.g. in the plural or genitive? The lemma form would not be a reconstruction. From this derives the rule that we can disregard the inflectional part. And in the genitive the ending in Latin and Gaulish is the same, isn’t it too arbitrary to assume that then there is no “deformation”? But it is still not Latin in any case, whichever form is chosen, there is no evidence for it being Latin but for it being Gaulish. It literally says, “the Gauls call it briginos”, exactly this form, and not “the Gauls when speaking Latin”, the most natural interpretation in this glossary. If a Latin reader in antiquity reads “the Gauls call it briginus it is implied that the ending there is a wee bit different, as quotation practice was not like today. For antiquity standards this is how one has to abstract from the details, the intended meaning of the text. The text behind the text. It says that. Textual witnesses aren’t in that good a state either. Have you looked how the Punic in Poenulus is attested? It’s a forest of gibberish through which you have to look through to see the trees, it may be even up to the point of a small inexactness the author himself smuggled into the first text(s). A variant reading is not a reconstruction. And it would be an exaggeration to speak of a conjecture, emendation or reconstruction here. That man has no sense of proportion.
- The request was out of process from the beginning since all attestations were given, something else is requested … Fay Freak (talk) 21:07, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
- “Attested”, not in the Latin quotation, but in the English translation supplied by you. Is your strike-through of the heading, as if the issue has been resolved other than by a shouting match, not somewhat out-of-process? --Lambiam 19:38, 30 October 2021 (UTC)
- Quotes are given, but again: none has briginos. Attested are only briginus etc. (By the quote, βρικίνη however could rather be a Greek than a Gaulish term.) Compare with Vandalic eils vs. *heils, and e.g. Old Prussian wolistian (attested) vs. *āzistin (M. Klussis' (re-)construction), *vɔ̄zistʹan (V. Mažiulis' (re-)construction). --Myrelia (talk) 19:21, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
- Move to reconstruction namespace. FWIW, kids throwing a tantrum can be ignored in our discussions. Akletos (talk) 09:31, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- It is a simple test to decide whether a word goes to the mainspace or reconstructed space: Is it attested? This word is, it has (even three) quotes for it, so it is situated in the mainspace. Only kids that blow their tops when they don’t get everything they want try to bend the rules and make representations when they face some edge that diverts them from furnishing their dollhouse. Fay Freak (talk) 18:00, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
November 2021
[edit]This is given as an Assamese word in the Ahom script. A literal translation of the word would be [i]oṃrīta[/i]. As we do not list Ahom as a script of Assamese, I believe such an entry needs to connect to an attestation. Unsurprisingly, Google finds nothing but clones of Wiktionary - it takes time for text to appear in Unicode. As @Msasag added the spelling, I hope he can oblige us with such a connection. --RichardW57m (talk) 12:49, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
- “As we do not list Ahom as a script of Assamese” → non sequitur. We do not list all every scripts in which a language has been written. If I assess that Ahom script was used for Assamese – which on first glance makes much sense but we also have Middle Assamese, so perhaps it does not apply to the present chronolect – I may just add it, and your argument vanishes utterly into thin air. (And then, as you yourself seem to acknowledge, by Pali experience, we don’t always seek an attestation for a word in every script, but I say this as others do not realize this situation.)
- But no less we want to know from Msasag how or from where he gets these spellings, to assess the situation. Fay Freak (talk) 21:11, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
December 2021
[edit]Arabic. Rfv-sense "the prophet Muhammad". This is part of the exegetical interpretation, but does anyone actually refer to Muhammad by this name? —Μετάknowledgediscuss/deeds 17:13, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
- For some background, see Ta-Ha. The name is not included in the many names of the prophet Muhammed. --Lambiam 18:14, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
- Anecdotally yes, this is a somewhat known name/title of the prophet (based on some interactions I had irrespective of what the traditions or exegeses say). In any case the name is very common in poetry (maybe more so among Shia Muslims?). I will add two more references and remove the request, feel free to re-add it if there's still a problem. --Almuusawi (talk) 20:00, 2 March 2025 (UTC)
Is this really an Ancient Greek suffix? 1. re: The definition of the term "suffix": It's not attached to the stem (or another analysable morphological entity), but the outcome of regular sound change involving the closing consonant + a suffix -jō (or of a surface filter operating for a longer period of time; I don't know if this would make any difference). 2. re: Its productivity in Ancient Greek: Can it be shown that there are words formed with -σσω in Ancient Greek rather than in one of its pre-stages? There are candidates for this in the "Derived terms" section (e.g. φαρμάσσω, ἱμάσσω). --Akletos (talk) 12:41, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
- I think this not a suffix, just like -ssus in Latin fissus is not a suffix but the result of a phonological process at play in fi(n)d- + -tus. If this is deleted, the same fate should befall -ζω (-zō), -λλω (-llō), -πτω (-ptō) and -ττω (-ttō). --Lambiam 10:39, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- @Lambiam @Erutuon Perhaps the content of these entries can at least in part be transferred to Category:Ancient Greek verbs with a progressive iota or yod marker (and the cat. be renamed?). Akletos (talk) 20:02, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
Indonesian. Moved to RFV from an RFD: Wiktionary:Requests_for_deletion/Non-English#bomba --Fytcha (talk) 15:21, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
- Also copying over the rationale of the original poster:
The word is almost never used in Indonesian. ind_mixed_2013 corpus from Leipzig did "attest" the word but keep in mind that the corpus is mixed with Malay, but if it's not a Malay word then the word is a proper noun or not widespread enough.
News corpora didn't show anything.
Mahali syarifuddin (talk) 14:34, 13 November 2021 (UTC)
Albanian. IP marked it for speedy (Br00pVain). —Svārtava [t•c•u•r] 06:40, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
- @Lumbardhia, Bolt Escargot, Etimo any thoughts? Thadh (talk) 14:55, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
- according to the online lexicons: http://m.fjalori.shkenca.org/, https://fjale.al/brinar, and https://fjalorthi.com/brinar, brinar is an accepted word for a cuckold in the albanian lexicography. seems to be derived from the word bri (brinë in Gheg), a euphemism for a woman donning "horns" for her husband. Lumbardhia (talk) 15:57, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
Does not meet criteria for inclusion: is a numeric consisting of two words more than 100. --Jarash (talk) 19:25, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
- @Jarash: Should be sent to WT:RFDN. Fytcha (talk) 00:25, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
- There're also six thousand, nine thousand, níu þúsund - they show the correct spelling (with space or not?) and the formation (9 * 1000, not 90 * 100). --05:26, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
- I think maybe the inclusion criteria for numbers are a bit too restrictive. I'm pretty sure we used to make exceptions for numbers above 100 that were sufficiently "interesting". Obviously that is in the eye of the beholder but 10,000 seems it should qualify. Cf. Russian де́сять ты́сяч (désjatʹ týsjač), which also exists (and given the complexity of Russian numbers, should arguably exist to help users correctly decline the number and its complement, if any). BTW English ten thousand qualifies regardless as it is a translation hub. Benwing2 (talk) 04:53, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
- There're also six thousand, nine thousand, níu þúsund - they show the correct spelling (with space or not?) and the formation (9 * 1000, not 90 * 100). --05:26, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
January 2022
[edit]Following some mild edit warring in astronaut, I've went ahead and created this article so I can RFV it. Pinging @İtidal, MhmtÖ, 123snake45. --Fytcha (talk) 03:54, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
- Ah, I just realized this should probably have been uçurucu. So just a
{{misspelling of}}? On the same note, what about fezagir? That one has also been the target of edit warring. --Fytcha (talk) 03:58, 4 January 2022 (UTC)- Turkish has both a suffix -ci and a variant -ici. The latter is attached to the stem of causative verbs (anlatıcı, canlandırıcı, çökertici, parlatıcı, sağaltıcı, uyuşturucu), and tends to form words that are primarily adjectives, so the neologism uçurcu is IMO more plausible than uçurucu. The suffix -ci is usually attached to a noun, though, and although the participle uçur can grammatically be used as a noun, it is not in actual use as such. (Compare the words çıkarcı and dönerci, in which the first component is a participle that has an independent existence as a noun.) As to fezagir, one of the ambitions of President Erdoğan is to send a Turk into space to kick off the Turkish National Space Program, and wouldn’t it be nice if they then could refer to this space voyager with an ur-Turkic term, instead of one with (blech) Greek roots. At the end of a lengthy speech, in which he revealed that astronomy and trigonometry had been invented by Turks, Erdoğan said: “Since a compatriot of ours will enter space, it is now necessary to find a Turkish counterpart for the words ‘astronaut’ or ‘cosmonaut’. From here, I call on our linguists and say, come, let us find a Turkish name for Turkish space travelers. Let our 83 million citizens too participate with their original ideas in this quest.”[16] This led to many suggestions, such as semanot, göknot, gökoğul, gökbey, evrenot, gökalp and cacabey.[17] Serdar Hüseyin Yıldırım, the administrator of the Turkish Space Agency, proposed the term fezagir.[18] That is, as far as I see, the status of fezagir on sources we accept for attestation: mentions as a proposal for a neologism. --Lambiam 17:25, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
- when i saw the "uçurcu" i thought it was an ungrammatical form of uçurucu, neither of them used for astronaut nor meaningful so i undid the edit. Then i learned that the translation dictionary of Pamukkale University does have the words "uçur" and "uçurcu". I dont know how does "uçur" means "universe, space" (aorist of uçmak which is intransitive of "to fly" is uçar "he/she/it does fly, something that flies") or where did they found the word but both of the words doesnt exist in the offical dictionary.
- As for fezagir, Lambiam wrote how it came up, they probably took the word from Uzbek and proposed but nobody uses it as much as i know. MhmtÖ (talk) 10:09, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
- How do we label Turkish words proposed as replacements for foreign borrowings, used three times per CFI, but not in common use? I don't like nonstandard here because some of the words were proposed by a government committee to create and possibly enforce a language standard. I would not be surprised to find some newspapers did use the government's proposals; at least one newspaper published periodic lists of coinages saying they would henceforth use them to replace Ottoman words. Yet most of those words did not enter common use. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 20:02, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
Central Kurdish: nothing at ku.wikipedia or anything that isn't auto-translation site Br00pVain (talk) 22:43, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
- Page 441 of the 1879 Dictionnaire kurde-français[19] has "هردایم her-dàim, toujors". This is likely a more northern dialect, the dictionary being prepared largely in eastern Anatolia. A modern Northern Kurdish dictionary has her dem. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 00:51, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
Might be archaic but I would like to see evidence that it's not made up. --Optional (talk) 01:09, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
- Update: User:Rodrigo5260 moved this to کتاب لغت in April 2023 and removed the RFV tag. I can't read any Persian, so I have no way to judge the two citations above or understand the difference in spellings. @Optional, Rishabhbhat Does the move to the new spelling resolve this issue? Or does this still need citations? —Granger (talk · contribs) 20:09, 22 September 2025 (UTC)
- Well کتب لغت (kutub-i luġat / kotob-e loġat) would be its plural, but isn’t this SOP? “book of words” Saam-andar (talk) 20:19, 22 September 2025 (UTC)
- @Saam-andar In other words, کتب لغت is the plural form and کتاب لغت is the singular form? (SOP is a question for RFD, but if we can't find citations in the first place then there's no need to bring it there.) —Granger (talk · contribs) 20:47, 22 September 2025 (UTC)
- Well کتب لغت (kutub-i luġat / kotob-e loġat) would be its plural, but isn’t this SOP? “book of words” Saam-andar (talk) 20:19, 22 September 2025 (UTC)
February 2022
[edit]Translingual. Most of the entry could be taken are referring to Proteaceae a long-established plant family. Almost all Google Books hits are for Protoeaceæ (ie, ae ligature). If we are to have an entry we need citations. I've spent time looking, but haven't exhausted BHL or similar sources. So far each alleged hit for Protoacea turns out to have the ligature on close inspection. DCDuring (talk) 01:05, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
- I have removed a specious reference to the 1911 Century Dictionary (William Dwight Whitney, Benjamin E[li] Smith, editors (1911), “Proteacea”, in The Century Dictionary […], New York, N.Y.: The Century Co., →OCLC.). The entry there is for Proteaceæ, analyzed as Protea + -aceæ. --Lambiam 11:43, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
- I have emended the entry based on my readings of material at BHL. Although I have not added citations they are available as snippets from the BHL link provided. Is this good enough? DCDuring (talk) 14:53, 3 April 2023 (UTC)
Romani. Wörterbuch Romani-Deutsch-Englisch für den südosteuropäischen Raum by Boretzky and Igla, Morri angluni rromane ćhibǎqi evroputni lavustik by Marcel Courthiade, and ROMLEX only list variants of morthǐ as the Armenian loanword for "skin". --YukaSylvie (talk) 08:50, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
- @YukaSylvie The entry lists two references, an Armenian etymological dictionary and what looks like a Romani-French dictionary. Romani is an LDL, so a single mention in an appropriate source is sufficient for keeping the entry. Are either of those references considered adequate for Romani? —Granger (talk · contribs) 04:04, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
Romani. I can't find this word on Wörterbuch Romani-Deutsch-Englisch für den südosteuropäischen Raum by Boretzky and Igla, Morri angluni rromane ćhibǎqi evroputni lavustik by Marcel Courthiade, ROMLEX, or a Google Books search. --YukaSylvie (talk) 02:22, 22 February 2022 (UTC)
Arabic. --2A01:E0A:B69:5160:242C:2020:97A9:DCCE 13:00, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
- One will find quotes relating to occupations in Persia and farther east; noting the references I added. This will be about the same level as “Arabic” سِپَاه سَالَار (sipāh sālār). وَٱلكَرَّانِيَّ، وَهُوَ الْكَاتِبُ / وَٱلتُجَّارَ وَٱلرُؤَسَاءَ / وَٱلتِنْدِيلَ وَهُوَ مُقَدَّمُ ٱلْرُجَّالِ / وَسِپَاه سَالَارَ (wal-karrāniyya, wahuwa l-kātibu / wat-tujjāra war-ruʔasāʔa / wat-tindīla wahuwa muqaddamu l-rujjāli / wasipāh sālāra) in the quote at كَرَّانِيّ (karrāniyy). Fay Freak (talk) 17:48, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
Hebrew.
The headword כוץ is different from the word used in the example, קוץ. Which is which? Sartma (talk) 19:19, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
- Hebrew קוץ means "thorn or thistle", which is makes it semantically more plausible. From the discussion of the word on their talk page, it's apparently slang- so they might not have known its proper written form. That said, if everyone spells it כוץ, that's how we should spell it. Chuck Entz (talk) 20:34, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
- Delete כוץ at this point; it's been here for 17 years with no improvement. Hftf (talk) 10:56, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
March 2022
[edit]Turkish. The spaced spelling kirli kartopu exists. That is a translation of dirty snowball, which I do not consider a word meaning comet but an adjective and a noun describing a comet. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 13:19, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
- The term was used in that spelling in a question on the Turkish version of Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?. The question was, “Of which of the following is this a synonym?”, with a choice between A: the Moon, B: Venus, C: a comet, D: the Pole star.[22] Many uses found online are quoting this quiz question, as seen here or here, in articles that otherwise use the spelling kirli kartopu. This calque of dirty snowball does (in some contexts) mean “comet”, just like the English original.[23][24][25] The Turkish Language Association considers the spelling kirlikartopu the correct spelling[26] and lists it like that in its authoritative dictionary, but the spelling kirli kartopu is quite common. --Lambiam 22:44, 2 March 2022 (UTC)
It seems it is a typo.--159.146.45.126 20:53, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
- Nope, it isn’t. You can look for this word in the official dictionary of Turkish, published by Turkish Language Association. I added the link as a reference in the page of the word.
Rarotongan. @MinecraftGod12345 as the creator. — Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 00:38, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
- @Fytcha It is article-worthy. I am making heaps of new entries about geography in Cook Islands Māori by finding them in an online dictionary. MinecraftGod12345 (talk) 00:41, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
- An interesting case. First, the language: We call the language "Rarotongan", while Wikipedia calls it Cook Islands Māori and says calling the language "Rarotongan" is controversial, as Rarotongan is supposed to be one of three dialects of the Cook Islands Māori language. WT:LT doesn't mention these languages, so it may have never been discussed by Wiktionarians.
- This dictionary labels Verengiteni as "Mangaia(n)", which is apparently a sub-dialect of Rarotongan. Another site gives "Poneke" as the name for Wellington, which would be from Maori Pōneke.
- To verify these names, we just need to find a single use or mention in a durably archived text. The name of Wellington (at least) should be easily cited from any Cook Islands Māori news source, but I can't find any written news in this language. RNZ produces Cook Islands Māori radio news programs, and SBS previously did, but these would not be durably archived. This, that and the other (talk) 01:29, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
- In yesterday's RNZ news bulletin the speaker code-switches and just says "Wellington" at 1:31 and "Christchurch" at 0:19, as with other English words like "supermarket" at 3:00 and "campaign" at 3:18. This, that and the other (talk) 12:42, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
Alemannic German.
No results at Google and Google Books and not in Google Groups / Usenet.
Possibly too add: hän Sii morn scho öppis vor, goots dr besser, goots Ine besser, sind Sii ghüroote ([27]/[28] gives: sind Sii ghüratä). --Sasha Gray Wolf (talk) 15:07, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- @Sasha Gray Wolf: That's a bit ridiculous, don't you think? It is obviously correct and the parts are easily attested: häsch du morn scho öppis vor. — Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 15:23, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- It's not a verification request for the parts but for the phrase as a whole (I'm not a fan of protologisms if they aren't marked as such). One could also translate may the Force be with you, hätte, hätte, Fahrradkette or other phrases but that doesn't mean the translation is used/attested. --Sasha Gray Wolf (talk) 16:25, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- lol @ protologism. The last link in my previous reply proves that "scho öppis vorha" is used in this way and all other words are separately attested; slight variations of the complete phrase are also found on the internet. Exactly the same argument is true for sind Sii ghüroote, see e.g. isch ghüroote. RFVing a phrase that is obviously and patently correct, that is found (with slight variations) on the internet, and whose constituents are attested is just a complete barrator move. @Widsith, Chuck Entz — Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 16:54, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- It's not a verification request for the parts but for the phrase as a whole (I'm not a fan of protologisms if they aren't marked as such). One could also translate may the Force be with you, hätte, hätte, Fahrradkette or other phrases but that doesn't mean the translation is used/attested. --Sasha Gray Wolf (talk) 16:25, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- IMO this is simply a SOP. The response could be, jo, ich hä scho öppis vor morn. One could then equally ask un häsch du ibermorn scho öppis vor?. We also do not have entries for as-tu quelque chose à faire demain or yarın yapacak bir şeyin var mı. So send to rfd. --Lambiam 11:11, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- @Lambiam:
- @Lambiam:
Phrasebook entries are very common expressions that are considered useful to non-native speakers. Although these are included as entries in the dictionary (in the main namespace), they are not usually considered in these terms. For instance, what is your name is clearly a summation of its parts.
Phrasebook entries are supported in the criteria of inclusion by a passage dedicated to them in the section "Idiomaticity"; they may not meet the requirement of idiomacity other than for the dedicated passage.
— Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 11:21, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- The
{{rfv}}tag was placed below the{{phrasebook}}label, which is why I did not spot that label when I clicked the section title. --Lambiam 07:42, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
- The
- If this is "very common" it should be findable in exactly the form presented. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 13:12, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- Not if the language is generally unwritten. Thadh (talk) 14:00, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- And also has an unsettled orthography, varying by region, when written (e.g. moorn next to morn). --Lambiam 07:42, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
- Not if the language is generally unwritten. Thadh (talk) 14:00, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- I don't really have a great interest in Phrasebook entries. Since I was tagged I can only comment that I have certainly heard the phrase used and it's clearly correct and useful for learners, but I am neutral on its inclusion as I have never quite understood what the attestation/SOP requirements are for phrases of this kind. Ƿidsiþ 08:11, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
- Well, logically at the very least WT:CFI (one use or mention for a LDL) must be fulfilled. Otherwise people could translate phrases into any other language. Then we could get (my English isn't) the yellow from the egg (“(my English isn't) the best”) (cp. [29], [30]). Or may the Force be with you translated into all kinds of other languages (extinct languages like Gothic, conlangs like Esperanto, living LDLs). And then the situation with phrases would be like with Navajo animal terms (cp. A, B, C, D) or Scots (E, F).
- What can be found: "hesch öppis bsungers vor für morn" ([31]), "hesch du no öppis fertig z'mache" ([32]). --Sasha Gray Wolf (talk) 10:22, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
- There's a difference between adhering to the letter and the spirit of the law. Of course we should be wary of nonsensical literal translations such as the ones you've mentioned, but this isn't a concern here as this phrase is clearly idiomatic and in widespread use (not only confirmed by two speakers but also by analogy as "Ich ha dänn scho öppis vor." is attested). The fact that you've moved another patently correct article bisch du ghüroote to a slightly different spelling bisch du ghüüroote (diff) while ignoring the fact that the variant in question (ghüroote) is also widely attested, is pretty strong evidence that idiomaticity and barring protologisms isn't your concern with this ordeal at all. Anyway, I have more productive things to do than squabbling over my native language and wading through the combinatorial jungle just to find that one attested altform among the thousands of correct possibilities. — Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 10:59, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
- I propose that we close this under the clear widespread use clause. There might be some variation of this phrase that is attested letter by letter but I'm not going to bother searching for it (even just öppis has many synonyms, all of which have multiple alt-forms). My above comment from 14 March 2022 explains it pretty well. This phrase is legitimate. — Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 09:13, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
Multiple Basque given names
[edit]This RFV affects Xoangotei, Xoantako, Xopeiza, Xorut, Xoro, Xoroko and Xuntako. All of them have a source (which I don't have access to), but they don't seem to be in use (not even mentioned) anywhere. The closest thing to an attestation I've found is this use of "Xoroko" as a nickname (an affectionate form of zoroko (“fool”)). The author of the book given as a source is a serious scholar so I suspect most of these supposed given names might actually be nicknames.--Santi2222 (talk) 14:41, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
Identical to the verb дѣти (děti) except with a nasal vowel. A rare variant or just a mistake? — 69.120.66.131 00:22, 15 March 2022 (UTC)
- Looking into it, I'm not even sure дѣти (děti) is attested with all of the meanings listed there. дѣꙗти (dějati) appears to be the more common form, and дѣти (děti) is mostly just attested in the reflexive phrase дѣти сѧ (děti sę). — 69.120.66.131 00:32, 15 March 2022 (UTC)
Ladino. I could find sources describing a Ladino word "aver" meaning "air", which I added as references to the page. There is also "avel" meaning mourning ([33], [34], [35]). I could not find any sources describing a word "avel" meaning "air".
If deleted, should be moved to aver as the content is good other than the title. If kept, it must be a secondary form and the main entry should be at aver; unless, of course, it is actually a separate word and not just a variant. 70.172.194.25 02:52, 15 March 2022 (UTC)
Ladino. karuvim is in the source I added. keruvim (in the form keruƀim) is in DHJE, but only with the meaning "cherubs", and I did not find any other spelling variant that could be this word. (Note that in Hebrew כְּרוּב and קָרוֹב have different initial consonants, in addition to the subtle niqqud change.) If deleted, should just be moved to karuvim. 70.172.194.25 01:43, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
Ladino. Same story as the previous two; a word like it definitely exists, but I can't find this particular form. In this case, mabul is the seemingly right form. 70.172.194.25 02:01, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
- I'm not exactly an expert on Hebrew, but when I seen a double vowel in a language that has glottal stops, it makes me think one might be present, as in "ma'abe". Another consideration is that מ־ is a very common prefix with a number of functions, so you would want to check words starting with aleph or ayin as well. That said, I didn't see anything obvious along those lines, so you might already tried that and not bothered to mention it. Chuck Entz (talk) 05:02, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
- Yeah, I agree. It feels like it would be from the root ע־ב־ה or something. Well, the ending is unclear because it could be clipped. Anyway, here's a neat site that lets you search for words belonging to roots with multiple possible characters in each slot, allowing for some guesswork: [36]. I'm not seeing anything, but I might not be looking in the right places (well, if I include yodh, I can find the mabul one, but I assume we're looking for other possible etymons). Special:PrefixIndex/Mem-Ayin-Beth and Special:PrefixIndex/Mem-Aleph-Beth don't show anything promising either. 70.172.194.25 05:33, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
- Someone back in August removed everything except the etymology from this entry for no obvious reason. 70.172.194.25 07:56, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
Moved from RFD. Earlier discussion: WT:RFDN#αρbε̰ρ. Thadh (talk) 23:35, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
- I found άρbε̱ρ in these Beiträge zu einem albanesisch-deutschen Lexikon [Contributions toward an Albanian–German lexicon] and I found the Greek Ἄρβερ on pages 84 and 88 of Nikolaos Georgiou Nikokles' 1855 De Albanensium sive Schkipitar origine et prosapia · Περὶ τῆς αὐτοχθονίας τῶν Ἀλβανῶν ἤτοι Σκιπιτάρ [On the ancestral source of the Albanians or Shkypetars]. Do they help at all? Fruitless Forest (talk) 19:38, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Astova, Erutuon, Fytcha, IMIPER, Lambiam, MelancholicLinguist, Prosfilaes, Rua, SemperBlotto, SKA-KSI, Thadh, as editors of αρbε̰ρ and/or as contributors to the deletion discussion, I thought you might have an interest in this. @Sarri.greek, do Άρβερ (Ἄρβερ), αυτοχθονία (αὐτοχθονίας), and Σκιπιτάρ warrant entries, in your opinion? Fruitless Forest (talk) 14:44, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Fruitless Forest about Άρβερ Σκιπιτάρ = if there is a PoS 'Transliterations' for nongreek words, similar to Romanizations, probably they could be created with your ref. I am not sure how such unadapted and rare occurrences are handled at en.wiktionary. On the other hand, αυτοχθονία is a normal noun (Standard Modern Greek), spellt with αὐτο- in old polytonic spelling, the word since 1815. (cf αυτόχθων (aftóchthon).
- @Thadh, SKA-KSI I think αρbε̰ρ, αρbε̰ρισ̈τ, αρbε̰ρίσ̈τ should be deleted & replaced for the following reason: These 'greek' scripts with added latin characters & diacritics mimicking phonetics were created by lexigographers of past centuries and, alas, by the Dialect Dictionary of the Academy of Athens (which ended ingloriously somewhere at letter delta). As far as I know, they have been abandoned for some decades. I understand that the contemporary practice is to lemmatise the closest usual greek script + I.P.A. accompanying it. Here these scripts, could be mentioned (with {lang}, no link) at the main corresponding Albanian.dialect lemma, with their IPA as described in the dictionary from where they were retrieved. They would be αρμπερ (don't know where the accent was), αρμπερίστ (I cannot see the difference of the two) at arbërisht etc. Source and IPA are very crucial for the presentation of dialects, precisely because a script did not exist.
- The wikipedia article'Arvanitika' has a list of characters for these script, probably reproduced in more wikis and sites. I tried to find scanned pages of the correspondance referred at @en.wikt via third sources, (I doubt that the particular writers used umlauts and nongreek diacritics when writing arvanitika), but i could not find a scan. If so, the phrase in some lemmata 'script used by Arvanites', ...more likely: 'script proposed by X dictionary'. I cannot be sure; I would need to read the introduction of the source-dictionary. All other similar scripts I have encountered, are constructed by lexicographers, never used by native speakers (who for most dialects, were illiterate).
- But I am not the right person to verify all this. Whether their lemmatization is justified or not would need verification by a professional expert. @Dr Moshe -sorry to trouble you, Sir, just for the legitimacy of lemmatizing-.
- Thadh, please note, that all the templates: Template:list:Greek script letters/aat, Template:list:Greek script letters/acy & Template:list:Greek script letters/tsd were created by anonymi, probably by copying such proposed scripts, with no reference whatsoever. All lemmata with such scripts could be deleted as well as the templates, if the above paragraphs are accepted as correct. Perhaps this issue could be discussed in general in a different page? Thank you ‑‑Sarri.greek ♫ I 22:56, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
Mongolian. Not in any Mongolian dictionary I can access. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 00:27, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
[37]. Mongolian is an LDL, so I guess this is satisfactory. Thadh (talk) 11:17, 3 April 2022 (UTC)- Never mind, upon further inspection this doesn't seem to be a real book Thadh (talk) 21:55, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- This does seem to be in (at least informal) use, but as a borrowing from English. Russian borrowings don't change ⟨е⟩ to ⟨э⟩. @Thadh Are you sure? I'm getting the expected result when I do an ISBN search. Theknightwho (talk) 11:21, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
- @Theknightwho: Missed this ping for some reason. No, I'm not sure. Thadh (talk) 12:53, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
Coptic. Ⲉⲑⲱⲙ/ⲁⲑⲱⲙ are reconstructions. Ⲟⲛⲟⲩⲣⲓⲥ is a transliteration of a Greek rendering of an Egyptian god’s name. ⲧⲟⲩⲏⲣⲉ/ⲑⲟⲩⲏⲣⲓ are etymologically correct forms, but never used in the sense of the goddess Tawaret in Coptic texts. Ⲅⲉⲃ just looks like the Egyptological pronunciation of gb written in Coptic letters.Rhemmiel (talk) 03:58, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
- ⲑⲟⲩⲏⲣⲓ is attested by Coptic Dictionary Online. It is important to remember that Jean-François Champollion spoke Coptic and he was the one that reconstructed the ancient Egyptian language, and it is likely that ⲉⲑⲱⲙ, ⲁⲑⲱⲙ, ⲅⲉⲃ, and ϩⲛⲟⲩⲙ are the translation of Atum, Geb, and Khnum in Coptic. Ⲁⲡⲟⲗⲗⲟⲇⲱⲣⲟⲥ (talk) 14:00, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
April 2022
[edit]Old English dīeġan is missing from both the Dictionary of Old English and Bosworth-Toller; this appears to be because it is entirely unattested; as smeortan, the OED has a note to this effect. Now as was done with that verb, we could relocate it to Reconstruction:Old English/diegan in the very likely event that cites do not end up emerging. However, I question whether the reconstruction of such a verb is necessary; the obvious justification for doing so is the existence of Middle English deyen, but that could be easily be from Old Norse deyja. This is the standard etymology given by the dictionaries, and I see no reason be at variance with them. With Middle English deyen taken out of the way, we are thus left without any justification for the reconstructing *dīeġan. It may be worth using {{no entry}} at diegan, though, as it appears to be frequently brung up in online discussions of Old English (only some of which note its tenuosity). Hazarasp (parlement · werkis) 11:04, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
- @Hazarasp: In B&T there is a redirect from dīeġan to dīġan, which is found here [[38]]. There is some uncertainty whether dēog means "died" or "dyed". It's translated both ways, depending... Leasnam (talk) 20:38, 4 June 2023 (UTC)
- Neither of those explanations are satisfactory to me; instead, I prefer to take dēog as the past tense of a verb *dēagan (“to hide”) (< Proto-Germanic *dauganą; c.f. Old High German tougan (“hidden”)). The DOE supports this hypothesis preliminarily, but remains noncommital, but I believe the poetic context means that it is the only hypothesis that rings true to me: interpreting dēaðfǣge dēog as "doomed to death, he dyed" makes little sense, while "doomed to death, he died" is conceptually repetitive doggerel (it is also not clear that the past tense of a putative *dīegan would result in dēog). Moreover, despite Bammersberg's statement that dēog has "no generally accepted interpretation", the "hid" hypothesis seems to be usual in the recent literature (e.g. in A Guide to Old English, Beowulf and the Hunt, Blogging Beowulf: Fit XIII, Lines 837-924, Eldum Unnyt: Treasure Spaces in Beowulf, and The conceptualisation of emotions in Old English: dream 'joy' as LIFE, PRIVILEGE and HEAVEN in Anglo-Saxon prose and poetry). Hazarasp (parlement · werkis) 13:25, 5 June 2023 (UTC)
German. Seems like a protologism, as fair as i saw no example at the linked DWDS, only one example at google books. --學者三 (talk) 21:17, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
- The term occurs in the heading of an official German regulation published in the Bundesgesetzblatt 2021 Vol. I nr. 62, page 4077,[39] as short (!) for Besondere Gebührenverordnung des Bundesministeriums der Finanzen zur Finanzdienstleistungsaufsicht. This should be considered a proper noun, the (nick)name of a specific entity. Since the regulation provides for a convenient abbreviation of the short name, FinDAGebV (see used here), I guess we won't be seeing many uses of the term. --Lambiam 11:41, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
- Confirmed in so far it occurs in neither Beck Online nor Juris. However this is a hot word since the regulation is in effect since 01.10.2021. On the other hand it must have been applied somewhere and thus the FinDAGebV must be on record at some authorities somewhere, as if there are laws someone follows them, in Germany. A written abbreviation is enough since the short name Finanzdienstleistungsaufsichtsgebührenverordnung is how the abbreviation FinDAGebV is pronounced. Chinese pronunciations themselves aren’t supposed to occur in writing either yet pinyin gets entries. Fay Freak (talk) 18:49, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
I could not find evidence of this word anywhere in Assyrian Neo-Aramaic, only in other Aramaic languages.— This unsigned comment was added by Shuraya (talk • contribs) at 01:23, 25 April 2022 (UTC).
May 2022
[edit]Yamphu. This is given under a Yakkha header but with a Yamphu language code and reference. The given reference [40] has two Yamphu words for "bird": सोङा (soṅā) and सोङ्वा (soṅwā), but not साङ्वा (sāṅwā). So is this actually Yakkha, or a Yamphu typo, or a dialectal variant, or ...? @Hk5183 This, that and the other (talk) 02:17, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
- The third possibility is that this was supposed to go at Yamphu सोङ्वा (soṅwā), but the contributor was distracted by the similarity of the spelling (सो vs सा) into adding it to the wrong entry. Looking at their edit history, it was halfway into over an hour of creating nothing but Yamphu entries (the Yakka page creation was 9 days eatlier). By the way, @This, that and the other: you seem to have your language codes switched. Chuck Entz (talk) 06:59, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks, I have fixed the codes here. The two codes couldn't be any closer... This, that and the other (talk) 07:21, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
Gaulish: Is there any evidence that this existed as a distinct word? It appears to be the same as the element -briga, which is said in sources such as Matasović 2009:77 to be only attested as part of compound toponyms. So, this should be moved to Reconstruction:Gaulish/briga. — 69.120.66.131 22:05, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- Btw, see this discussion for some related info, such as Latin toponyms with this "suffix" that were borrowed from Celtic, some of which should probably be listed in the event that a reconstruction page is created. Note that these are -brīga in Latin, with long ī, unlike the short i currently transcribed at brigā (which might just have been a baseless assumption on the part of the entry creator). — 69.120.66.131 22:18, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
June 2022
[edit]Moved here from RfD. --Lambiam 08:09, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
This word doesn't exist in Turkish. Dohqo (talk) 06:16, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
- According to Turkish Language Association's Kişi Adları Sözlüğü (Personal Names Dictionary) it means: 1. Görkemli, kuvvetli, muazzam. 2. Yiğit, kahraman. 3. Rütbe, unvan.4. Bir tür kaplan. — This comment was unsigned.
- Not in
{{R:tr:OTK}}. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 18:49, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
Sanskrit. Rfv-sense: Kharoshthi.
So far as I am aware, it is an assumption rather than a good guess that the Sanskrit word refers to the script known as Kharoshthi in English. Any Sanskrit examples of usage in this sense would be from the last two hundred years. (On the other hand, the cited quotation is the ultimate known source of the English word.)
I think the word may actually have two senses - whatever script it meant in the original sense (if it isn't a word like jabberwocky), and the Kharoshthi script as known today. However, we don't have a quotation for the latter! --RichardW57m (talk) 14:22, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
- Discussion moved from WT:RFDN.
Hebrew. Apparently incorrect. --Huckerby980 (talk) 12:44, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
- Keep. It's used in the press occasionally, although בית עבוט is more common. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 10:51, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
- Should we have an entry for משכונות by itself? I can't quite figure it out; could it be cognate to מִסְכֵּן (compare Mozarabic משכון (mškwn))? From the uses it seems to have three meanings: (1) pawn (security for loan)[41]; (2) pawn shop (perhaps by shortening of חנות משכונות); (3) neighbourhood. Cases of the last one are probably misspellings of משכנות. --Lambiam 09:16, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
- Discussion moved from WT:RFDN.
This is a Pattani Malay word. - Patnugot123 (talk) 18:01, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
- Why should it be deleted? Can't it just be turned into a Pattani Malay entry?
←₰-→Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk) 10:48, 6 June 2021 (UTC) - @GinormousBuildings can you respond to Patnugot123's request by demonstrating that this is in use as a Malay word, or whether it belongs to the distinct Pattani Malay language? This, that and the other (talk) 12:48, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
July 2022
[edit]Old English. All I'm seeing is ælfþone (Bosworth-Toller). 98.170.164.88 00:39, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
- I created an entry for ælfþone. "ielfþone", along with "ielfiġ" originally appeared on this page: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/ielf#Derived_terms
"ælfþone" is in the Mercian orthography.
2602:306:CEC2:A3A0:A07C:91F6:D2CC:EC3A 00:46, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
Translingual. Rfv-sense: (botany, obsolete) biennial (the orbital period of Mars is 2 years)
As an aside, I assume the part about the orbital period of Mars is the etymology of the sense, but I'm not certain. Theknightwho (talk) 23:30, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
- You can find “♂ Biennial” and “♃ Perennial” here, as well as “☉ Annual”, thus extending the correspondence between the plant’s longevity and the astronomical object’s orbital period, undoubtedly the origin of the association of these symbols with plants. “♄” is also listed, but as simply meaning “Shrub or Tree” – all of which, however, are perennial anyway. Likewise here and here, although the latter has a toppled Jupiter in the table; later uses in the book are upright). --Lambiam 14:52, 8 July 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks. Taking the three sources together, I'd suggest that we amend ♂ to read
biennial plant
for the sake of consistency. All three sources seem to give a mix of noun and adjective glosses for these symbols, and they're not consistent with each other when it comes to the same symbol. Given that they're not used within running text, it doesn't really matter which style we choose, butbiennial plant
is more elegant thanOf a plant, binennial.
Theknightwho (talk) 15:17, 8 July 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks. Taking the three sources together, I'd suggest that we amend ♂ to read
Translingual. Rfv-sense: (botany, obsolete) herbaceous perennial plant (the orbital period of Jupiter is 12 years)
Not sure how the two halves of the sense relate to each other, to be quite honest. I guess herbaceous plants live longer than 2 years (see ♂) but less than woody plants (see ♄)? Theknightwho (talk) 23:35, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
- One reference has been added to the article. As far as I can tell it only mentions the term, defining it as "A perennial." —Granger (talk · contribs) 17:33, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
Translingual. Rfv-sense: (botany, obsolete) woody perennial plant (the orbital period of Saturn is 30 years)
Also unsure how the two halves of the sense relate to each other, but I assume it's to do with woody plants living longer than herbaceous ones (see ♃). Theknightwho (talk) 23:37, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
- One reference has been added to the entry, but I'm having trouble finding this symbol on the specified pages. —Granger (talk · contribs) 17:29, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
- It can be a bit hard to recognize, as described by Simpson 2010 Botanical symbols: a new symbol set for new images. kwami (talk) 18:59, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks, that helps. Based on that I suppose it is the symbol defined as "A true tree; as the Oak" and "An under shrub; as Laurustinus." I still don't think we have any uses of the symbol with this meaning, only two mentions. —Granger (talk · contribs) 15:01, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
- It's not too difficult to find uses, but they're all old. kwami (talk) 18:58, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Kwamikagami Could you provide three of them, to show that the symbol meets WT:CFI? —Granger (talk · contribs) 16:54, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
- I wrote to niki simpson, who knows the lit. i don't remember the sources i've seen (none of which i have on me), and a gbooks search doesn't work because they get hits for 'jupiter' and 'saturn'.
- BTW, this (p. 1604) mentions the orbital periods in conjunction w the botanical meaning (though there are some obvious copy errors).
- They were required knowledge for school exams in the 19th cent, but again those are mentions rather than uses. kwami (talk) 04:24, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Mx. Granger Okay, Simpson responded that she's mostly seen these "handwritten on very old herbarium sheets." One old printed example is Linnaeus Species Plantarum. ♃ (perennes) is very common, ♄ (fruticantes) less so, but appears for e.g. Salicornia #2, #4 on p5 of vol I.
- Perennis and fruticans BTW would be the authoritative definitions.
- Vol I is free on GBooks; you can find online links to all vols on Latin Wikisource. kwami (talk) 16:37, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Kwamikagami Could you provide three of them, to show that the symbol meets WT:CFI? —Granger (talk · contribs) 16:54, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
- It's not too difficult to find uses, but they're all old. kwami (talk) 18:58, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks, that helps. Based on that I suppose it is the symbol defined as "A true tree; as the Oak" and "An under shrub; as Laurustinus." I still don't think we have any uses of the symbol with this meaning, only two mentions. —Granger (talk · contribs) 15:01, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
- It can be a bit hard to recognize, as described by Simpson 2010 Botanical symbols: a new symbol set for new images. kwami (talk) 18:59, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
Old Norse. This edit by Xact (talk • contribs) added some extra information, but did not really follow the Wiktionary format, and I cannot verify the content because I cannot read the language of the book in the link. --kc_kennylau (talk) 00:48, 17 July 2022 (UTC)
- It looks like the info is right based on the reference, but they should have made a new L3 header for the noun instead of sticking it in the etymology. The quotation from the c. 1500 manuscript ("AM 625 4") is shown in the panel on the right of the reference, but someone more knowledgeable should confirm it I guess. 98.170.164.88 00:55, 17 July 2022 (UTC)
Arabic. Rfv-senses: "to be revealed or divulged, to become known", "(of a secret) to leak out". There was an edit war over whether to include these intransitive senses, in addition to the transitive sense of "to reveal, to divulge, to disclose", which is currently the only one that remains. To be clear, I was not involved in the edit war.
FWIW, Wehr lists all these intransitive senses as well as the transitive ones, almost verbatim: [42]. 98.170.164.88 03:08, 17 July 2022 (UTC)
- See my response above. — Fenakhay (حيطي · مساهماتي) 03:55, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
- Abu Al-Haytham Ibn al-Tayyihan said إن الوصي إمامنا وولينا برح الخفاء وباحت الأسرار [43] --2001:16A2:E950:3402:28B9:7B80:EB65:4073 09:49, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
August 2022
[edit]Rfv-sense Pokémon". Dennis Dartman (talk) 20:48, 1 August 2022 (UTC)
- @Dennis Dartman: The sense "Pokémon" is easily verifiable in any official translation of the games of the Pokémon series. Sartma (talk) 21:59, 1 August 2022 (UTC)
- See the deletion discussion, however. Dennis Dartman (talk) 23:21, 1 August 2022 (UTC)
- @Dennis Dartman, the confusion is that this is not about RFV of a specific sense for this term. (FWIW, Pokémon is the only sense currently in the ポケットモンスター (Poketto Monsutā) entry.) This is specifically seeking evidence that this passes WT:BRAND. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 21:30, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
An apparent calque of firearm, and synonymous with Feuerwaffe and Schusswaffe. But attestation of this word is scant (89 hits on Google, including those generated by the Wiktionary entry itself). It is not to be found in the usual dictionary/corpus database sources (Duden, Pons, DWDS, etc.), and the audio on the page is for Feuerwaffe (presumably copied across from that page). Can we find attestation to support this entry's existence? Voltaigne (talk) 14:31, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
- Here is a use of the term with a different meaning, possibly the same as for the implied use in Strodtmann’s feuerarm’gen Moloch. Some uses in the sense of a Schießgewehr: [44], [45], [46], [47]. If (as is IMO plausible) this is a partial calque of English firearm, the German noun Arm is innocent and the etymology we give needs to be corrected. --Lambiam 15:45, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
- I went and added 3 quotes to the entry based on the links you gave, it would pass CFI now I think. PhoenicianLetters (talk) 00:29, 29 November 2025 (UTC)
- I’ve changed the etymology to “partial calque of English firearm”. --Lambiam 19:19, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
- A leading apostrophe; a form of the apostrophe when it occurs at the beginning of a word.
Translingual. I have seen leading apostrophes in both old and new books but always as ’, never ‛. J3133 (talk) 18:47, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
Saek.
No evidence is presented that this spelling has ever been used, nor any explanation of why any recorded pronunciation with the alleged meaning 'five' should be written in this extraordinary manner. --RichardW57 (talk) 17:26, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
- This is correct written word and there are a lot of evidences. Since Seak has six tones (or seven but one is for fixing the right tone) so they need two more tone marks. I have all Saek orthography rules, dictionaries, and lores. They are defined many years ago. [48] See Fulltext.pdf page 62 for description. If you stick only with western authors, you won't see these. --Octahedron80 (talk) 01:00, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
Prematurely-created Mariupol Greek Greek spellings
[edit]Mariupol Greek. (As will probably be obvious from the section header.)
I created those by transliterating the Cyrillic entries for фукрум and яло, respectively, using the table in WT:GRK-MAR TR to convert Cyrillic into Greek script, assuming, rather naively, that this was a mechanical one-to-one conversion following the rules in the table.🤦♀️
I was quickly disabused of that notion.
Hence, listing the two ones I did create until advised otherwise here, to determine whether I managed to accidentally create the attested correct Greek spelling for these ones. Whoop whoop pull up Bitching Betty ⚧️ Averted crashes 15:28, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
- @Whoop whoop pull up: I have found and added a quote for both. Mariupol Greek seems to have a surprisingly large corpus of books published in the '30s - makes me rethink the fact that we lemmatise at Cyrillic. Thadh (talk) 16:54, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
- It has been brought to my attention by @Poursa0 on Discord that this isn't Mariupol Greek, but rather Demotic. So we're back to square one. Thadh (talk) 06:51, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
Thai. Rfv-sense: Accipiter spp.
Word might mean "dove", according to Hippietrail. I looked up all five Accipiter species found in Thailand, according to Avibase, which has vernacular names in many languages, and didn't find any Thai terms. Some English vernacular names for predatory birds contain the name of their prey in their name, like goshawk and sparrowhawk. DCDuring (talk) 13:05, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
- Non-domestic fowl normally prefix the classificatory word นก (nók, “bird”) to their names, as obscurely mentioned in the entry for เขา (kǎo). So Hippietrail is right about the word meaning 'dove', and googling finds plenty of confirmation for the meaning 'columbid'. However, if one looks up นกเขา
นin the Thai Royal Institute Dictionary, one will find it defined roughly as Accipiter, with the species A. trivirgatus, A. badius and A. gularis getting specific mention. The connection seems to be a similarity in plumage.- Fixed typo - spurious trailing no nu (น). --RichardW57 (talk) 20:22, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
- The hawk seems to be normally called เหยี่ยวนกเขา, as can be seen in the Thai Wikipedia at https://th.wiktionary.org/wiki/เหยี่ยวนกเขา. Quiet Quentin's found one book with that longer word; and I've found a newspaper website page at https://www.matichon.co.th/prachachuen/prachachuen-scoop/news_1716240 - I'm not sure how good that it is; and an example in the Bible at https://www.bible.com/th/bible/174/JOB.39.26.THSV11. I couldn't find any examples of just นกเขา for 'hawk'. --RichardW57 (talk) 00:26, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
Translingual. Rfv-sense: The Tether cryptocurrency, USDT.
Not seeing any uses of this as a currency symbol. Seems to be more of a branding thing. Theknightwho (talk) 12:30, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
- I don't know but it is in Wikipedia [[w:Tether (cryptocurrency)]|--Hekaheka] (talk) 12:46, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
- It is, but just because we can source them saying it's their currency sign doesn't mean it's actually used as one. Theknightwho (talk) 14:13, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
- https://tether.to/en/transparency/#usdt 198.84.224.219 17:54, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
- Translingual. Rfv-sense:
- Currently being used as USDT ("Tether") symbol by some exchanges such as crypto.com and OKX.com — This unsigned comment was added by 180.150.37.76 (talk) at 02:04, 28 June 2023 (UTC).
- Just pointing out we still have an open discussion above. —Soap— 05:20, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
- Merged the discussions. J3133 (talk) 13:36, 28 March 2025 (UTC)
- Just pointing out we still have an open discussion above. —Soap— 05:20, 29 June 2023 (UTC)
Mongolian. Not convinced this is a suffix in Mongolian. There are borrowed terms like буддизм (buddizm) and коммунизм (kommunizm), but they come from Russian. Theknightwho (talk) 14:11, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
- Are there any native terms, namely (/possibly) neologisms, that use the suffix? How aware are speakers that this is a suffix? Vininn126 (talk) 21:34, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
- Between Монгол хэлний зөв бичих дүрмийн журамласан толь and Большой академический монгольско-русский словарь I've found 50 - all of them are Russian borrowings. However, I've found evidence of цэдэнбализм (cedenbalizm, “Tsedenbalism”), which I suspect was coined in Mongolian. Theknightwho (talk) 23:18, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
- Tagging @Bathrobe, who may be able to comment on this. Theknightwho (talk) 14:56, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
- Between Монгол хэлний зөв бичих дүрмийн журамласан толь and Большой академический монгольско-русский словарь I've found 50 - all of them are Russian borrowings. However, I've found evidence of цэдэнбализм (cedenbalizm, “Tsedenbalism”), which I suspect was coined in Mongolian. Theknightwho (talk) 23:18, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
September 2022
[edit]The Inupiaq numeral system presented here is consistent with the vigesimal system of this language for small numbers, but seems rather strange for very large numbers in the millions, billions or trillions. It seems that none (except for the smallest ones) is attested outside https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iñupiaq_numerals. 193.54.167.164 13:29, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
- (@Kwamikagami since you added them) Honestly a very interesting number system, reminds me a lot of the Yorùbá number system. I looked for the source that's listed, "MacLean (2014) Iñupiatun Uqaluit Taniktun Sivuninit / Iñupiaq to English Dictionary, p. 840 ff", but I've been unable to without buying it or going to a physical library. I did find, though, "Edna Ahgeak MacLean (2012), Iñupiatun Uqaluit Taniktun Sivunniuġutiŋit North Slope Iñupiaq to English Dictionary, University of Alaska Fairbanks: Alaska Native Languages Archives", which seems to be a precursor to the prior source, and does have all the numbers cited. However, I don't have the energy right now to add them to every entry, so I'll leave it to y'all to decide if it's officially cited or not. AG202 (talk) 14:27, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
- These are the numbers taught in schools. Though the language is moribund. kwami (talk) 19:44, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
- The large numbers certainly aren't traditional. I imagine the language was extended to cover large numbers so that it would be adequate for science and mathematics. Something all languages with large numerals have done. kwami (talk) 04:40, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
Zhuang. Etymology 2: "seaweed; algae" and "green (as seaweed or algae)". Added by @Octahedron80. I could not find this in 壮汉词汇 or 壮汉英词典. It might be a misinterpretation of 古壮字字典, where daeuh is given as a syllable that can be used with raez in the word daeuhraez; it does not show any independent use of daeuh. — justin(r)leung { (t...) | c=› } 14:58, 14 September 2022 (UTC)
- I believe it is from your source gave me in 2019, where I saw sawndips, that is now unavailable. My sources do not state it either. daeuhraez might be the right word. (and how is it formed?) --Octahedron80 (talk) 00:10, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
- I found daeuh=blue (historical blue includes green) in Nong Zhuang [49] that should not be included in Zhuang; they are kind of different languages. --Octahedron80 (talk) 00:12, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
- @Octahedron80: I wonder if all the Zhuang varieties should be put under "Zhuang" (like "Chinese") or if we should actually separate them. I've been assuming that Zhuang functions the same way as Chinese in that it is a macrolanguage with all Zhuang varieties under it (with the appropriate labels for the regions). For example raemx seems to include most Zhuang varieties. — justin(r)leung { (t...) | c=› } 23:52, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
- Nong Zhuang, Dai Zhuang, Zuojiang Zhuang have more consonants and vowels than Standard Zhuang. Northern Zhuang (in Northern Tai) and Southern Zhuang (in Central Tai) are not the same group; it is obviously not able to unify. --Octahedron80 (talk) 01:27, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
Zuojiang Zhuang. Copied from Wikipedia. --沈澄心✉ 12:30, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
Zuojiang Zhuang. Mentioned in vunz#Zhuang. --沈澄心✉ 13:20, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
October 2022
[edit]Old English. "Old English cyningrīċe" is only attested as kynyngrīches (genitive) in a ostensible charter of King Edward the Confessor. The OED states that the charter is "probably a forgery of the late 11th or early 12th cent.
". After a admittedly brief and superficial examination of the text, I concur with the OED and would lean towards a later dating; the text appears to be nothing more than Early Middle English sprinkled in with a few archaisms, which leaves us with with no basis for a entry at cyningrīċe. Hazarasp (parlement · werkis) 03:16, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
- Hrrm Okay. Move to *cyningrīċe then ? There are cognates in Old Saxon kuningrīki, Old High German kuningríchi. Leasnam (talk) 20:45, 14 October 2022 (UTC)
- I don't think the existence of Old English *cyningrīċe is certain enough to create such a form. Note that kingriche is barely attested in Early ME (which would be unexpected if it was a old formation, as words for "kingdom" and "authority" occur profusely in early ME texts) and the earliest attestations vary between forms in nominative king, genitive kinges, and dative kinge, suggesting a new and unsettled compound.
- Let me digress for a bit now. I don't think the OS and OHG forms are relevant here, given that they could be modifications of earlier Old Saxon *kunirīki and Old High German *kunirīhhi (attested as chuneriche) with replacement of the mysterious unproductive Proto-West Germanic *kuni- with reflexes of semantically transparent *kuning. Contrastingly, OE speakers wouldn't've felt the need to replace cynerīċe with *cyningrīċe because the reflex of *kuni- (cyne-) was still productive in that language. Further proof for this theory is that kingriche only starts to appear with any real frequency after kine- (the ME reflex of cyne-) ceased to be productive, suggesting that it it is a modification kineriche along similar lines. Hazarasp (parlement · werkis) 13:59, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
- Hrm, alright. Well,
I'll probably still create a reconstruction for the OFS, OSX, GOH (*kuningarīkī) as a late remodelling of the original *kunirīkī. I think we should still leave the OE entry as an unrelated reconstruction though, since it's mentioned in so many places and folk will be looking for it, and no-doubt keep re-creating it if they do not find it. We can add a detailed Usage note explaining that it's most likely not real (?) Leasnam (talk) 17:29, 15 October 2022 (UTC)- Okay, you've already made it. What do you make of Old Norse konungríki ? Calque, or independent formation ? Leasnam (talk) 19:03, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
- We can use
{{no entry}}to dissuade people from creating cyningrīċe; no reconstruction page is needed for that purpose. As for Old Norse konungríki; I'm not sure about its status; I'd need more research into its attestation pattern to make a decision. Finally, I'll note that my theory about *kuningarīkī originally being *kunirīkī, while compelling (to me at least) is not something that I'm entirely dead-set on. It could be that *kuningarīkī is old (or at the very least a old remodelling) and was just lost in OE. It's even possible that there could've been a *cyningrīċe; the important thing is its existence isn't likely enough to justify sticking a stake in the ground by creating a reconstruction. Hazarasp (parlement · werkis) 19:22, 15 October 2022 (UTC)- I just took a look at the MED for king-riche. I think this is a borrowing/calque/partial-calque from Old Norse. Many of the forms are clearly Norse-like. Timeframe matches up as well. What do you think ? Leasnam (talk) 19:39, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
- Hrm, alright. Well,
Pali.
What evidence do we have for this form? The etymological form is อคฺคฬ (aggaḷa), with a retroflex lateral. --RichardW57 (talk) 21:28, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
- (1) ETipitaka Pali-Thai Dict & Pramaha Prasert Mantasevi's Thai-Pali Dict (2) Wisdom Library "Aggaḷa, & Aggaḷā (f.) (also occasionally with l.)" (3) Concise Pali-English Dictionary > shorturl.at/hnT27 sub dict // Single ฬ sometimes used as ล in many words, including the word 'Pali' itself. That's why I described there [50]. --Octahedron80 (talk) 01:38, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
- @Octahedron80: The only one of those sources of mentions that looks durably archived is Buddhadatta's Concise Pali-English Dictionary, which I think screams out for the use of
{{LDL}}. At least the PTS directs one to actual usages. Unfortunately, I suspect Buddhadatta's entry is itself a misspelling, or rather a typo. The preface says, "In compiling this work I have constantly referred to the Pali-English Dictionary,...", so why does Buddhadatta's work omit aggaḷa? --RichardW57m (talk) 11:16, 17 October 2022 (UTC) - Keep. Now, it is possible that Buddhadatta's work is sufficiently important that his errors will be repeated in modern compositions. If such compositions are to be included in our coverage, then it is helpful to users to include them. Additionally, there are very probably Sinhalese Pali manuscripts that use the dental instead of the retroflex. Accordingly, I propose categorising the spelling with a dental as a misspelling. We therefore should not record it as an alternative form in the correctly spelt lemmas. --RichardW57m (talk) 11:16, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
- I've created aggala and alternative citation forms aggalo and aggalaṃ, which all have the same evidentiary requirements as the challenged word. --RichardW57m (talk) 12:16, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
- The heading "Aggaḷa, & Aggaḷā (f.) (also occasionally with l.)" comes from the PTS, but the remark with 'l' (which looks like an obscure abbreviation because of the full stop!) might only apply to the feminine form. Childers[1] gives the masculine and neuter forms with the retroflex, but the feminine with the dental. --RichardW57m (talk) 12:50, 17 October 2022 (UTC) RichardW57m (talk) 12:50, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
- @Octahedron80: The only one of those sources of mentions that looks durably archived is Buddhadatta's Concise Pali-English Dictionary, which I think screams out for the use of
References
[edit]- ^ Childers, Robert Caesar, Dictionary of the Päli language, London: Trübner & Company, 1875, page 8.
Pali.
What evidence do we have for this form? The etymological form is अग्गळ (aggaḷa), with a retroflex lateral. This entry was created by @Octahedron80, as was the challenged entry above. --RichardW57 (talk) 21:34, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
- Same as above. --Octahedron80 (talk) 01:44, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
Pali.
See #อคฺคล above. --RichardW57m (talk) 14:14, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
Persian. — Fenakhay (حيطي · مساهماتي) 21:17, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
- He also says that people of the city Termez in Uzbekistan refered to لوبیا (beans) as ژاژومک
- ...و اهل ترمد او را ژاژومک گویند...
- A site lists other forms of ژاژومک (dehkhoda and amid) and according to Amid dictionary it's an old Biology term:
- ژاژوک (žâžôk) (dehkhoda and amid)
- ژاژک (žâžok) (dehkhoda)
- Dehkhoda quotes a poem couplet with an unknown meaning he found in the Asadi Persian Lexicon attributed to poet "Abul-Abbas" (probably Abu'l-Abbas Marwazi)
- ماه کانون است ژاژک نتوانی بستن / هم از این کومک بر خشک و همی بند آن را
- Dehkhoda quotes a poem couplet with an unknown meaning he found in the Asadi Persian Lexicon attributed to poet "Abul-Abbas" (probably Abu'l-Abbas Marwazi)
- ژاژمک (žâžomak) (dehkhoda)
- ژژک (unknown pronunciation) (Amid)
- Note: I found that "ژاژ" means a "kind of camelthorn which camels find too tough to chew." probably not related but thought sharing. Light hearted sam (talk) 13:04, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
- @Fenakhay added quotes on the page. Light hearted sam (talk) 17:37, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
Old English. Not in the DOE and apparently unattested as a adverb (rather than a inflected form of ġeon). Bosworth-Toller has a entry for ġeonre (providing no quotes), but it probably originates from a misinterpretation of the aforementioned inflected form. In any case, the Middle English forms (such as Chaucer's yonder instead of *yondre) seem to indicate Old English *ġeonor, not ġeonre; the presence of epenthetic /d/ is no counterargument, as it can originate in contexts such as yonder and (/ˈjɔn(d)r‿an(d)/). Hazarasp (parlement · werkis) 07:55, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
- Agreed. A search of the Dictionary of Old English Corpus yields only "Aris, & gong to geonre byrig;", which is certainly a declined form of geon.
- Perhaps yonder could also have developed from a comparative form of geond, i.e. geondor? Ythede Gengo (talk) 05:00, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
Mid-Autumn Festival Nanuk and the Peas (talk) 14:39, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
Navajo. — Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 21:02, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
- This is the kind of thing that Stephen G. Brown and @Metaknowledge were always arguing about, because the former was a professional translator whose job was to come up with a translation, not to inform people about the patterns of usage or non-usage in a given language. @Eirikr, who has studied the language. Chuck Entz (talk) 21:38, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
- I've actually taken notice of this problem back when Metaknowledge was still active. Without knowing a shred of Navajo, my opinion still is that absent any evidence that native speakers use these words (or even just understand them and deem them natural) we should not include them and I would hope this is the majority view here. Wiktionary is not a playground where people can publicize their inventions. If it actually is the case that these two terms are made up too, I would be pretty upset considering the traction they have gained on the internet. — Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 22:48, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
- A few of those threads cite Wiktionary ([58], [59], [60]), so if this turns out to be unattestable, which remains to be seen, then we aren't completely blameless in the spread of dubious information. I think the bigger culprit may be Navajo Wikipedia, but I can't really fault them for using circumlocutions to describe things their language has no word for. It's not like they should be prevented from documenting concepts just because there's no word for them in printed Navajo dictionaries. As for what Navajo people would say in actual speech if they wanted to refer to a tank, I have no idea, but I'd be a little surprised if they always went with this exact phrase just because it happens to be the one used on nv.wikipedia and here. 98.170.164.88 01:32, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
- Oddly enough, the Code talkers probably had a term for it, but that's not the same as use in ordinary Navajo text or speech. Still, there were a good number of Navajo veterans who no doubt would have talked about their experiences in the war. Chuck Entz (talk) 02:43, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
- Good point about the code talkers. For whatever it's worth, I found this word list, which says the code word for "tank" was "CHAY-DA-GAHI" ("tortoise"). I think this is chʼééh digháhii. As an aside, I wonder if it's worth incorporating the sense of "tank" into the entry in any way; it's not really normal language use, but code talking is probably among the most notable uses of the language and there are likely to be several references. (Are there even surviving recordings we could cite?)
- More to the point, if those Navajo veterans wrote books about their experiences in the Navajo language, we could consult those. If not, then I guess we could try to get in contact with a native speaker, preferably one who is unaffiliated with nv.wikipedia to avoid potential bias. CFI doesn't have a provision for adding words based on personal anecdotes that haven't been published, but I personally feel like a direct interview with a native speaker of a LDL may deserve at least as much weight as a Usenet post. At the very least, we could at least use the information to tell if removing this term is the right move. 98.170.164.88 03:19, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
- To address your point about what word ordinary speakers would use, my strong suspicion that they’d simply use the word “tank”. Obviously the code talkers situation may affect things (did chʼééh digháhii become the conventional word?), but it seems unlikely that these lengthy terms could be anything other than a novelty. Theknightwho (talk) 18:03, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
- Oddly enough, the Code talkers probably had a term for it, but that's not the same as use in ordinary Navajo text or speech. Still, there were a good number of Navajo veterans who no doubt would have talked about their experiences in the war. Chuck Entz (talk) 02:43, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
- A few of those threads cite Wiktionary ([58], [59], [60]), so if this turns out to be unattestable, which remains to be seen, then we aren't completely blameless in the spread of dubious information. I think the bigger culprit may be Navajo Wikipedia, but I can't really fault them for using circumlocutions to describe things their language has no word for. It's not like they should be prevented from documenting concepts just because there's no word for them in printed Navajo dictionaries. As for what Navajo people would say in actual speech if they wanted to refer to a tank, I have no idea, but I'd be a little surprised if they always went with this exact phrase just because it happens to be the one used on nv.wikipedia and here. 98.170.164.88 01:32, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
- I've actually taken notice of this problem back when Metaknowledge was still active. Without knowing a shred of Navajo, my opinion still is that absent any evidence that native speakers use these words (or even just understand them and deem them natural) we should not include them and I would hope this is the majority view here. Wiktionary is not a playground where people can publicize their inventions. If it actually is the case that these two terms are made up too, I would be pretty upset considering the traction they have gained on the internet. — Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 22:48, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
- This is difficult to confirm in the wild, as indeed a lot of Navajo is. At the moment, the best I've found is an instance of use on this webpage from a Jehovah's Witness website: https://www.jw.org/nv/Naaltsoos-b%C3%A1-Hooghan/naaltsoos/watchtower-study-july-2021/Jiih%C3%B3vah-Ha%CA%BC%C3%B3ln%C3%ADn%C3%ADg%C3%AD%C3%AD-Be%CA%BC%C3%AD%C5%82%CA%BC%C4%B1%CC%81%CC%A8/
- The full phrase / term chidí naaʼnaʼí beeʼeldǫǫh bikááʼ dah naaznilígíí isn't visible in the page text as rendered in the browser, but only in the alt text ona couple images -- view the source and search that to find the term. This appears a couple times in the source of the page, repetitions of the same sentence (emphasis mine):
1. Anaaʼ hólǫ́ǫgo siláo łaʼ chidí naaʼnaʼí beeʼeldǫǫh bikááʼ dah naaznilígíí yikááʼ dah sidá, łaʼ éí bikééʼ joojah.
- Very rough translation: “There is a war and a soldier sits on top of a [tank / the thing that's a car that crawls about and has a cannon and people sit on it], and one [the generic "one"] runs along after it.”
- Notably, this is content from the Jehovah's Witnesses, a group that makes an effort to translate texts into the languages of the groups they are proselytizing, so it is unclear to me if the author was a native speaker. That said, this is an instance of the term used in running text, and for an WT:LDL, that might suffice.
- I agree that an effort should ideally be made to contact the community of people actually speaking Navajo and get their input. However, I haven't the contacts needed to engage in such an effort, nor do I have sufficient bandwidth for the foreseeable future. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 17:48, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
- Incredible find! I'm curious how you came across this, since it doesn't appear to be indexed by Google or even jw.org's own search engine. 98.170.164.88 17:59, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
- Re: finding it, I had a hunch that Google was doing something stupid. I noticed a lot more hits for the substring chidí naaʼnaʼí (“car that crawls around → tractor”), so I modified my search: google:"chidí naaʼnaʼí" "átʼé" -wiki -wikt -intermedia -wordsense -glosbe The second hit was the Watchtower page, which (confusingly) contains the exact long phrase chidí naaʼnaʼí beeʼeldǫǫh bikááʼ dah naaznilígíí that Google was failing to find. HTH! ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 21:22, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
- As it’s such a descriptive phrase, could it be that this was the original source? Or does Navajo commonly use lengthy descriptions as set terms? Theknightwho (talk) 18:08, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
- The nv.wikipedia article dates to 5 July 2009, under a slightly different spelling (moved to the current title on 2 October 2009). The en.wiktionary entry was created 31 December 2009. On the other hand, the Watchtower article is from July 2021. 98.170.164.88 21:02, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
- So it is. My bad. Theknightwho (talk) 21:08, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
- The nv.wikipedia article dates to 5 July 2009, under a slightly different spelling (moved to the current title on 2 October 2009). The en.wiktionary entry was created 31 December 2009. On the other hand, the Watchtower article is from July 2021. 98.170.164.88 21:02, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
- Incredible find! I'm curious how you came across this, since it doesn't appear to be indexed by Google or even jw.org's own search engine. 98.170.164.88 17:59, 31 October 2022 (UTC)
The form with "beeʼeldǫǫhtsoh" is given as an example of a descriptive noun phrase in the introduction to Young & Morgan's Navajo Language (1980), and as its own entry on page 272 of the same dictionary. Also in other editions of the same work. Here is even an article from Ádahooníłígíí, a Navajo-language newspaper, that uses the term. 98.170.164.88 03:06, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
Revisiting this after a long break.
98's find of the Navajo newspaper article is from 1943, which uses this long phrase with the variant chidí naaʼnaʼí beeʼeldǫǫhtsoh bikááʼ dah naaznilígíí, adding on the modifier tsoh (“big”) to the noun beeʼeldǫǫh (“gun”). Considering the construction of the phrase, removal of the tsoh would not render the result unintelligible: it would change the meaning from something like "the caterpillar tractor that has big guns sitting up on top of it" to just "the caterpillar tractor that has guns sitting up on top of it".
Considering the 1943 quote with the tsoh (“big”) variant, the Jehovah's Witness usage with the non-tsoh variant, and Navajo's status on EN Wikt as a WT:LDL, do we think that these two terms pass RFV?
‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 01:14, 6 November 2025 (UTC)
November 2022
[edit]Gaulish, tagged but not listed. I assume the situation is that the term is attested (perhaps in a work designated as "Autun"?), but with unclear meaning. The referenced book says it "appears probable" that the second element means "seat" and relates it to sella and 𐍃𐌹𐍄𐌻𐍃 (sitls), but makes no attempt to interpret the first element. Can we get the context sentence into the entry, if it exists?__Gamren (talk) 10:00, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
Czech. Sense: (dialectal) Beating or fighting stick (Word used to threaten with or initiate a fight)
I suspect this sense does not meet WT:ATTEST. @Kreyren. I will note for the newcomer that authoritative dictionaries do not count and that we need quotations in use and that they need to be from print (incl. Google Books) or from Usenet. If this gets deleted, the discussion will be archived to the entry talk page, so the hypothesis will be available there to the interested readers. --Dan Polansky (talk) 09:11, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Dan_Polansky: Would agree the word prýgl is not well known as to my knowledge it was rarely used and too many people confuse prigl vs prýgl to mean Brno Reservoir. The only relevant source (beyond an expert opinion as hantec native and doing research locally) I could find is http://prigl.cz/brnaci/jak-vznikla-slova-prigl-borec-a-brno, thus why I argue that due to the nature and development of hantec it should receive a special treatment in terms of attesting to verify the words through historical references and co-relation to documented languages at the time like the one provided in https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Talk:prigl --Kreyren (talk) 10:35, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
- To clarify: Because Hantec is very dynamic language as it's developed by natives who take a word they like and then make it sound like moravian-ish to then get situations when there are like 20+ terms for women breasts.. Thus the only sane approach should be to look into the origin of the word and contest it on the bases of history and linquistics. --Kreyren (talk) 10:46, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
- The difference between "prigl" and "prygl" is merely in spelling: it is the same word. In so far as Hantec is an uncodified dialect, there is no "correct" spelling, and we have to look at actual use, consistent with WT:ATTEST. From normative perspective, one may note that "r" is usually followed by "y" and not "i", and from that standpoint, "prygl" and "prýgl" are preferable spellings, and this may explain why they are easier to find in print in Google Books. I added the sense of Brno Reservoir to prýgl since that is attested in use; whether someone considers it "wrong" is beside the point in a descriptivist dictionary such as Wiktionary. --Dan Polansky (talk) 10:52, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
- prigl vs prýgl are two very very very different words which are spelled differently and pronounced very differently like "jet basem na prigl" vs "Dostaneš prygle vole!" with notation on the "Y" in "prygle" to near english accent in nature. --Kreyren (talk) 02:03, 6 November 2022 (UTC)
- The difference between "prigl" and "prygl" is merely in spelling: it is the same word. In so far as Hantec is an uncodified dialect, there is no "correct" spelling, and we have to look at actual use, consistent with WT:ATTEST. From normative perspective, one may note that "r" is usually followed by "y" and not "i", and from that standpoint, "prygl" and "prýgl" are preferable spellings, and this may explain why they are easier to find in print in Google Books. I added the sense of Brno Reservoir to prýgl since that is attested in use; whether someone considers it "wrong" is beside the point in a descriptivist dictionary such as Wiktionary. --Dan Polansky (talk) 10:52, 5 November 2022 (UTC)
Nothing refers to this. Not even close to Chinese. --Octahedron80 (talk) 02:32, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
- I found the word in ไคเภ็ก [61]. (ฮอกฮี is [62], transcribed from Hokkien.) Outside ไคเภ็ก: the Thai wikipedia page for นฺหวี่วา [63], and [64], [65], [66], [67] (spelling?). Not sure how much this word is used (instead of cite)? Thriftypapaya (talk) 17:30, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
Translingual. Rfv-sense: androgyne, intersex (especially when male in appearance)
. This has been/is the target of some edit-warring which is probably best solved by adding supporting quotations. — Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 21:44, 10 November 2022 (UTC)
- Just noting that this has been slightly redefined to "
androgyne, gender-neutral, intersex.
" but it still has no cites of use. It's sourced to a work by McElroy, which was also used to source some other supposedly-trans symbols which turned out to not actually be used, or to not even be in McElroy (see 2023 Info Desk). If we can't find actual evidence of use, we're probably best off removing it. - -sche (discuss) 06:43, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
Navajo. An IP keeps changing this from "sea horse" to "zebra", the latter of which was removed here pursuant to this RFV. They've also created this tea room thread. Can somebody please look into the attestability of both terms? Thanks. — Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 02:36, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
- Pinging @Eirikr as the only active user knowledgeable in Navajo (that I know of). — Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 02:38, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
- The Navaho Language (1972) by Young & Morgan has this as "zebra", but it looks like it might not have a space between the components. 98.170.164.88 02:43, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
- This 1980 edition, by the same authors, puts a space between the components, and gives three senses "water horse (mythological animal), zebra, sea[-]horse". This 1971 edition only gives "zebra". 98.170.164.88 02:52, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you, I restored the zebra sense and added the spaceless alt-form (though that may have been a mistake, I'd prefer to wait for someone knowledgeable in Navajo before doing more edits). The other IP user also pointed to additional usable sources in the tea room thread. I added an older version (1943) of Young & Morgan to the entry because that is conveniently citable off of Google Books using your script. I don't know whether there's a standard
{{R:nv:...}}template for this reference. — Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 03:05, 12 November 2022 (UTC)- I'm tempted to add
{{syn|nv|łį́į́ʼ noodǫ́ǫzii|lit=the striped horse}}based on this reference. 98.170.164.88 03:31, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
- I'm tempted to add
- Thank you, I restored the zebra sense and added the spaceless alt-form (though that may have been a mistake, I'd prefer to wait for someone knowledgeable in Navajo before doing more edits). The other IP user also pointed to additional usable sources in the tea room thread. I added an older version (1943) of Young & Morgan to the entry because that is conveniently citable off of Google Books using your script. I don't know whether there's a standard
- This 1980 edition, by the same authors, puts a space between the components, and gives three senses "water horse (mythological animal), zebra, sea[-]horse". This 1971 edition only gives "zebra". 98.170.164.88 02:52, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
- Belatedly, @Fytcha, thanks for the ping, but I would not have been of much help here. I've studied Navajo, but only a little from books and audio, and I have no contacts with native speakers. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 21:23, 14 November 2022 (UTC)
December 2022
[edit]Russian. Rfv-sense: "Block Island". I can find use in Russian of остров Блок (ostrov Blok) and Блок-Айленд (Blok-Ajlend), but does this usage extend to Блок (Blok) on its own? In a quick search I wasn't able to find e.g. "на Блоке". Also, even if this sense does exist, someone should check the animacy (the word is currently marked as animate, but place names in Russian are generally inanimate). 98.170.164.88 00:18, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
- The Russian Wikipedia seems to have article titles for all but one of the New England islands indexed as simple titles, as seen at w:ru:Категория:Острова_Род-Айленда. Presumably the same is true outside New England. Whether this reflects actual speech in Russian, or an idiosyncracy of the Russian Wikipedia, I dont know. —Soap— 23:59, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
- Don’t these uses of “Блок” in the combination “остров Блок”[68][69][70] count as attestations, just like in English the use of “Bali” in the combination “the island of Bali” should qualify? --Lambiam 11:32, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
- Hmm, yeah, I did find use in such contexts but wasn't sure it counted. If Russian-language editors think it should count, then I'm fine with it.
- Another example where "остров" is an essential part of the name is остров Принца Эдуарда (ostrov Princa Eduarda), and it would be weird to put that under Принца Эдуарда (Princa Eduarda). There are also остров Врангеля (ostrov Vrangelja) and остров Колгуев (ostrov Kolgujev). I think остров Блок (ostrov Blok) is similar to these in that it is always preceded by остров and the word Блок itself doesn't get inflected. But I could be wrong. A dissimilarity with these other examples is that they have the name of the island in the genitive, but OTOH two of them are originally surnames, which also applies here. 98.170.164.88 13:08, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
Russian: I can't find references to either of those two meanings. The dictionaries I have available give the translations "to get lost", "to be astray". 78.69.121.4 20:00, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
- @78.69.121.4: The senses given were right but it's hard to understand without a context and more examples. I've expanded a bit and added some usage examples for senses you may have doubts. It's a verb with many meanings. Also @Tetromino, Thadh, Benwing2: please see if it needs further improvement. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 00:37, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
RFV-passedNyuhn (talk)- @Nyuhn: Not one quote has been added to the entry, until every sense gets at least three quotes (/references), they are technically not RFV-passed. Thadh (talk) 15:42, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
- These senses are widespread. I've added couple of quotes. There are lot more on ruscorpora. Nyuhn (talk) 16:23, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
"ČR" is a well-established abbreviation for Česká repubilka, "Czech Republic" and this meaning absolutely prevails. The names of the other three republics do begin with the same letters in Czech language, but the frequency of the usage of those other republic names is extremely small compared to the frequency of the usage of "Czech Republic", so that the abbreviation ČR meaning "Chechen Republic” etc. would have to be explained in context. I sincerely doubt that the abbreviation "ČR" is used in the sense of Chechen Republic” etc. Amsavatar (talk) 16:55, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
- (A helpful IP has added two cites to the sense ROC and one to the Chuvash Republic.) - -sche (discuss) 04:48, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
Ancient Greek. Rfv-sense: “perhaps also ox”. --Lambiam 08:37, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
- Does the fact it's used in the Septuagint to translate Hebrew שׁוֹר (šôr, “ox”) count? See e.g. Exod. 21:35, "ἐὰν δὲ κερατίσῃ τινὸς ταῦρος τὸν ταῦρον τοῦ πλησίον, καὶ τελευτήσῃ, ἀποδώσονται τὸν ταῦρον […] " in the LXX, "ox" in the vast majority of English translations though Strong's glosses it as "ox, bull, a head of cattle" [71]. —Al-Muqanna المقنع (talk) 13:39, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
- Seems this is also the case in the New Testament, without Hebrew interference: almost every translation gives "oxen" for ταῦροί in Matt. 22:4, cf. also this reference. —Al-Muqanna المقنع (talk) 19:12, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
- I've added the quote and translation from the standard critical editions of Matthew and I've noted that Bauer's New Testament lexicon says the same thing about the word, so I'll call this cited. I've changed "perhaps" to a non-gloss note "chiefly as a sacrificial animal" per Bauer. A separate question, which might need further research, is whether the sense should be explicitly tagged as Koine. —Al-Muqanna المقنع (talk) 12:00, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks. A complication is that English ox has two distinguishable senses: (1) a male bovine, used as a draught animal, typically gelded – as such a hyponym of bull; (2) any bovine animal – as such a hypernym of bull. In Modern Greek, ταύρος (távros) is strictly a bull, so one wonders if this sense as a sacrificial animal is indeed specifically Koine. --Lambiam 12:17, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
- By Lev. 22:24, a gelded bull could not be used as a sacrificial animal. Is that relevant here? --Lambiam 12:43, 23 December 2022 (UTC)
Navajo, meaning "Star Wars". The headword is given as "Sǫʼtah Anaaʼ", but the page title is "Sǫʼtah Anah". But are either of these even attested? And even if they are attested, do we really want an entry for this (cf. WT:NSE, etc.)? 70.172.194.25 18:49, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
- Apparently there is a Navajo dub of the original 1977 film, which may bolster the case for inclusion, although I'm still not sure. Which spelling did they use, btw? This article uses "Anah", but this one uses "Anaaʼ" (in an image). 70.172.194.25 19:07, 25 December 2022 (UTC)
January 2023
[edit]This is obviously morphologically incompatible with our Proto-Brythonic reconstruction. The inscription containing this name has case endings; in our reconstruction they're gone already. It's clearly not in the same language as our Proto-Brythonic and thus shouldn't be sorted under "Proto-Brythonic". — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 22:15, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- Also the etymology line is clearly anachronistic. It’s weird seeing the form being derived from clearly much younger lemmas. // Silmeth @talk 22:27, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- In retrospect, probably better to give it a Proto-Celtic header with a Brythonic label. --Skiulinamo (talk) 02:04, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
- Done. I had to make Proto-Celtic attested tho. --Skiulinamo (talk) 02:25, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
- ...It's not Proto-Celtic either. Not only is Proto-Celtic itself dated too early for the inscription to be Proto-Celtic (the inscription was written around Roman times), the inscription itself has the wrong accusative singular ending (-in instead of -am). It is almost certainly not attested Proto-Celtic. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 03:10, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
- At some point, granularity just becomes pedantic and makes fools of us all. --Skiulinamo (talk) 04:06, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
- Your move also caused technical problems (we'll continue this at Beer Parlor). — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 04:27, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
- It should certainly be put under ‘Brittonic’, it’s much to late to be Proto-Celtic. That’s just a fact, it’s not pedantic, it’s just correct. You wouldn’t put a French noun under ‘Latin’… Silurhys (talk) 20:54, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
- At some point, granularity just becomes pedantic and makes fools of us all. --Skiulinamo (talk) 04:06, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
- ...It's not Proto-Celtic either. Not only is Proto-Celtic itself dated too early for the inscription to be Proto-Celtic (the inscription was written around Roman times), the inscription itself has the wrong accusative singular ending (-in instead of -am). It is almost certainly not attested Proto-Celtic. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 03:10, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
- Done. I had to make Proto-Celtic attested tho. --Skiulinamo (talk) 02:25, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
- As we're discussing in another thread here, Proto-Brittonic/Brittonic should be a daughter of Proto-Celtic and the hypothetical parent of Brittonic (attested from the 4th/3rd century BC and lasting until the mid 6th century AD, when it gave way to Neo-Brittonic). Uindiorix dates to the Brittonic period and should be labeled as Brittonic. Wiktionary ridiculously calls Archaic Neo-Brittonic (mid-5th century AD through the end of the 8th century AD) "Proto-Brythonic"; both inaccurate and idiosyncratic, as no professional Celticist uses this term to refer to Neo-Brittonic. M.Aurelius.Viator (talk) 20:27, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
I've moved it back to Proto-Brythonic. It's true that attested Proto-Brythonic forms don't match up with our reconstructed forms, but we call them both Proto-Brythonic anyway. —Mahāgaja · talk 18:40, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
Proto-Brythonic. Attested in Latin ADIXOUI DEUINA DEIEDA ANDAGIN UINDIORIX CUAMENAI, but - in the same vain as Artognou - that seems to make it a Latin transcription of a Proto-Brythonic name, and not a Proto-Brythonic term in its own right. Theknightwho (talk) 16:51, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
- @Theknightwho: You are technically right if it is a Latin sentence, so this page would have to be split into a Latin page and a Proto-Brythonic reconstruction. But the inscription’s language has been controverted. So it could be an Undetermined language lemma as some other names including ΒΟΥΗΛΑ. There would be no gain in information with either option. Technically it is an attested term with arguable header attribution. Fay Freak (talk) 17:00, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
- @Fay Freak I would prefer to have the Proto-Brythonic entry at a reconstructed normalised spelling, with a Latin entry at Uindiorix that states it's a Latin transcription of the Proto-Brythonic name. That would keep the distinction clear, better matches the expectations of users who work in one language or the other, and also leaves room for discussion as to what the best normalised form actually is. Theknightwho (talk) 17:08, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
- @Theknightwho, as a minute of research would tell anyone, the sentence Uindiorix is attested in is today universally agreed upon by scholars to be in Celtic, not Latin. The only question is if it's too old to fit in how we on the project define Proto-Brythonic, and not dialectal Proto-Celtic. @Mahagaja --
{{victar|talk}}22:45, 22 May 2023 (UTC)- The sentence isn't Latin at all. The clearest evidence is found in the lexeme andagin, composed of an- "un" and dagin "good (accusative)". Kwékwlos (talk) 11:35, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
- @Theknightwho, as a minute of research would tell anyone, the sentence Uindiorix is attested in is today universally agreed upon by scholars to be in Celtic, not Latin. The only question is if it's too old to fit in how we on the project define Proto-Brythonic, and not dialectal Proto-Celtic. @Mahagaja --
- @Fay Freak I would prefer to have the Proto-Brythonic entry at a reconstructed normalised spelling, with a Latin entry at Uindiorix that states it's a Latin transcription of the Proto-Brythonic name. That would keep the distinction clear, better matches the expectations of users who work in one language or the other, and also leaves room for discussion as to what the best normalised form actually is. Theknightwho (talk) 17:08, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
Skalvian. RFV-term, appears on Reconstruction:Proto-Balto-Slavic/tewas. Is this language even attested at all? For some reason, extinct Baltic languages are a magnet for questionable additions. The person who originally added this also included Sudovian, Old Curonian, and Kursenieki.
- Sudovian is barely attested, only in one word list (that scholars aren't even sure is Sudovian) and a few short sentences from one medieval book (that are likely actually Old Prussian, and academic Old Prussian dictionaries treat them as such, e.g. [72]). The form they added for Sudovian, "tove", was apparently an unattested invention of Suduva.com; I have replaced it with an attested spelling from the word list.
- Old Curonian is in a similar situation, only having one representative text (which isn't even securely identified as Curonian), but possibly a great deal of words could be legitimately academically reconstructed from onomastics and the significant regional influence it had on Lithuanian/Samogitian and Latvian. Luckily, the one purportedly Old Curonian text is the Pater Noster, so the word for father is attested ("thewes"), but it doesn't even match the spelling added by the user ("thæwæs", which has no other hits on Google) unless I'm missing something.
- Kursenieki is definitely attested, and even has two living speakers, but it's still rare so it nonetheless sets off a bit of an alarm. The particular Kursenieki form "teve" may be attested, as searching for "teve mūses" on Google brings up some hits, mostly various Wikipedias and one 2017 self-published ebook (funnily enough cited on w:lv:Kursenieku_valoda, but surely an instance of citogenesis since the text has been on de.wikipedia since 2012), but I have no idea the original source/authenticity of this Pater Noster translation. ALEW, which I trust more but still isn't an ideal source, gives "têvs" as the Kursenieki cognate of Lithuanian "tėvas". Dictionaries and texts in the language exist but I don't think I can access any of them. The form is superficially plausible, although I have to wonder whether "teve" is supposed to be the vocative instead of the nominative (lemma form), which I would have expected to end in -s. For example, the Lithuanian Pater Noster starts with "tėve mūsų", instead of the lemma form "tėvas". But in Latvian, of which Kursenieki is a dialect, the nominative and vocative are both "tēvs", so IDK.
70.172.194.25 00:07, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
Burmese. Created by a vandal. RcAlex36 (talk) 16:04, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
- This Twitter post makes me think the term might be real. Dunno about the etymology. Whether it's citable to our standards, IDK either. The current citation is terrible (the title of a random YouTube video consisting of various clips of dancing women; the word isn't even spoken in the video, nor is any word other than "one, two, three, four"(?) at the start). 70.172.194.25 21:47, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
February 2023
[edit]Ancient Greek.
I can't find any evidence of this, but I don't have access to good resources on Ancient Greek proper nouns. Given the religious proscriptions on use of the Divine Name, I'm skeptical, but I don't know enough about Koine usage to be sure. Chuck Entz (talk) 16:26, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
- Hellenistic Jewish writers still needed a form to write, as יהוה is, and those proscriptions don't exist for non-Jewish sources, cf. the citations at Ἰαω, so there's nothing inherently implausible about it on purely religious grounds. This particular form is quite difficult to track down, though. The claim at Iehova that it's attested in the Gnostic Pistis Sophia (which survives only in Coptic in any case) appears to stem from an earlier Wikipedia misinterpretation of Charles William King's 19th-century study The Gnostics and Their Remains, which, while discussing the Pistis Sophia, mysteriously states that "The author of the 'Treatise on Interpretations' says, 'The Egyptians express the name of the Supreme Being by the seven Greek vowels ΙΕΗΩΟΥΑ'". (Wikipedia now correctly states "Charles William King attributes [it] to a work that he calls On Interpretations", but previously ascribed it to the Pistis Sophia.) Unfortunately King gives no indication at all as to what the 'Treatise on Interpretations' is, and it's never mentioned again. So I'm inclined to delete this, in the absence of any better evidence. —Al-Muqanna المقنع (talk) 18:21, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
- I think the place to look for this would be the Greek Magical Papyri, which are absolutely littered with all sorts of theonyms, including many variations on the Tetragrammaton, as well as all sorts of ‘magical’ sequences of the seven Greek vowels. I haven’t found this exact form myself with a cursory glance, but if it would be anywhere, that would be the most likely set of texts to search. (Also note that King refers to ‘the Egyptians’; the Magical Papyri themselves originate in Greco-Roman Egypt.) Another source that may have some information about where this comes from, if anyone can dig it up, is Gesner’s 1746 De laude dei per septem vocales; various more modern books refer to this when discussing this particular form. — Vorziblix (talk · contribs) 02:50, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
- Edit: I’ve dug up the above-mentioned treatise by Gesner; it can be found on p.245 of this work (Commentarii Societatis Regiae Scientiarum Gottingensis vol. 1). Unfortunately I don’t think my Latin and Greek are quite up to the task of wading through it, but if someone else wants to give it a try, perhaps there might be some useful references there. — Vorziblix (talk · contribs) 03:07, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
- I found ΙΕΗΩΟΥΑ (in all caps) on page 254 of Gesner's thesis, but the thesis is written in Latin, and the term is only mentioned, not used. I don't know whether this is sufficient for inclusion. —Mahāgaja · talk 09:08, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
- Not per WT:CFI: "one use in a contemporaneous source". Io. Matthias Gesnerus lived in the 17th/18th century; Greek ended in the 15th century (developed/degenerated into New Greek). If Gesnerus would quote some old text (maybe now lost/destroyed), it could pass; but not if it's just Gesnerus.--08:09, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
- I found ΙΕΗΩΟΥΑ (in all caps) on page 254 of Gesner's thesis, but the thesis is written in Latin, and the term is only mentioned, not used. I don't know whether this is sufficient for inclusion. —Mahāgaja · talk 09:08, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
- Edit: I’ve dug up the above-mentioned treatise by Gesner; it can be found on p.245 of this work (Commentarii Societatis Regiae Scientiarum Gottingensis vol. 1). Unfortunately I don’t think my Latin and Greek are quite up to the task of wading through it, but if someone else wants to give it a try, perhaps there might be some useful references there. — Vorziblix (talk · contribs) 03:07, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
- I think the place to look for this would be the Greek Magical Papyri, which are absolutely littered with all sorts of theonyms, including many variations on the Tetragrammaton, as well as all sorts of ‘magical’ sequences of the seven Greek vowels. I haven’t found this exact form myself with a cursory glance, but if it would be anywhere, that would be the most likely set of texts to search. (Also note that King refers to ‘the Egyptians’; the Magical Papyri themselves originate in Greco-Roman Egypt.) Another source that may have some information about where this comes from, if anyone can dig it up, is Gesner’s 1746 De laude dei per septem vocales; various more modern books refer to this when discussing this particular form. — Vorziblix (talk · contribs) 02:50, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
Polish. Wikipedia articles don't count. Vininn126 (talk) 18:28, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
- The Wikipedia articles don't count as cites, but it's worth noting that both that article as well as ziarnojadek's refer to the Jagiellonian University's Complete Checklist of the Birds of the World, so it might be worth looking somewhere there. Hythonia (talk) 11:13, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
Polish. Wikipedia articles don't count. Vininn126 (talk) 18:46, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
- It's been some time, but I found this, for whatever it's worth. Hythonia (talk) 19:02, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
As an inhabitant of West Bengal and a native speaker of Bengali, I don't think I have ever heard of these terms. I found nothing like these in Bengali-language publications in West Bengal, including Anandabazar Patrika, Bartaman etc. So far, I have found words like বীরভূমবাসী and বর্ধমানবাসী, which are demonyms of বীরভূম and বর্ধমান respectively. --Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 06:24, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
Pali. Rfv-sense: Does the feminine of the present participle santa have this form? --RichardW57m (talk) 13:43, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
Translingual. Synonym of :D
Isn't this an alternative form of :P or :p? Theknightwho (talk) 06:20, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
- Uh, this is difficult, how would you distinguish in quotes? Both are asumed faces. It is sure though that in some cases it is the former due to typing so lazily as to omit pressing the shift key. Fay Freak (talk) 11:54, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
- Tbh I usually see it used with a bit more irony cheekiness, :d is more like :v. :D is usually just expressing joy. Vininn126 (talk) 12:02, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
- Then let's forgo defining it as “synonym of” aught and relegate the uncertainties, concerning which actual symbols it is related to, to the etymology. Fay Freak (talk) 13:12, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
- Did we all see the comment on Talk:Unsupported_titles/:d? Because I was skeptical too. I dont play that game but the explanation makes sense. And, as for other online games ... I can see how an originally capitalized emoticon could evolve to lowercase for ease of typing in a fast-paced video game, especially these days when we rely so much on more colorful emojis. —Soap— 10:05, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
- Then let's forgo defining it as “synonym of” aught and relegate the uncertainties, concerning which actual symbols it is related to, to the etymology. Fay Freak (talk) 13:12, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
- Tbh I usually see it used with a bit more irony cheekiness, :d is more like :v. :D is usually just expressing joy. Vininn126 (talk) 12:02, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
Pali. Rfv-sense: swim
Pali. Rfv-sense: float
I can't find this meaning in any dictionaries, and I've looked in PTS, Childers, Maung Tin and Buddhadatta. Wiktionary does have this meaning for the cognate Sanskrit तरति (tarati). The meaning was added for Pali by @LolPacino. --RichardW57m (talk) 12:36, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
March 2023
[edit]An unadapted English loanword in the extinct language Cochimi of western Mexico. The cactus was given this name in English at just about the time when Cochimi was going extinct, so I wonder if it's even meaningful to say whether the word is or not part of the language. It's also a bit strange that a language native to the cactus' habitat would need to borrow from English to describe it, so it's possible this is an error of some kind and that the scientist never intended boojum to be part of the Cochimi language. The Spanish and Nahuatl wiktionaries also list this word as belonging to two other languages of the area, so for those who edit other wikis, this RFV could be applied to those languages as well. —Soap— 12:59, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
Kashubian. Gołąbk lists as hôk, I propose the entry be moved. Vininn126 (talk) 22:30, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
Thai. Rfv-sense: a transgender woman.
As a (native) Thai speaker, I have never found anyone using the term to refer to any transgender woman. Also, a Google search did not return any use of the term in such a sense. --Asembleo (talk) 15:45, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
I tried myself to verify the existence of this name but I was unable to find anything reliable on it, I've also never seen it in any charters or the Domesday Book and to my knowledge the element ǣdre isn't used in any other Old English names. Pirsicola T. (talk) 22:46, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
Lisu. This doesn't make sense within the Fraser script orthography, and I can't find any evidence of it online. The "transliteration" is very clearly taken from A Dictionary of the Northern Dialect of Lisu, but in actual fact that uses a separate Latin orthography altogether that follows quite different rules.
I suspect this was simply copied from the Chinese Wiktionary. Theknightwho (talk) 04:05, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
April 2023
[edit]Cebuano. Imagine an alternate history in which Russia invaded the Philippines instead of Spain. Sounds like @Carl Francis lives there. Kwékwlos (talk) 12:53, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
- There are citations at Citations:Vladimir. I don't know whether they are durably archived. —Granger (talk · contribs) 14:53, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
Polish. Partial verification request for the definition. Kaci is the relational adjective of the noun kat, which has two distinct meanings: literal, "executioner," and figurative, "tormentor." It's pretty easy to find usage of the noun in the figurative sense, but I can't seem to find occurences of kaci as relating to it, only to the literal meaning (especially in collocations like kaci topór — executioner's axe, kaci kaptur — executioner's hood, etc.). Hythonia (talk) 13:44, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
- Notably, WSJP clearly states it only relates to "executioner". Vininn126 (talk) 13:55, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
- Quote from [73] (1840): "Kiedy miano czarownice i czarowników próbować torturami, kaci zabobonnicy i guslarze wielcy, golili im na sam przód włosy" (English: "When witches and sorcerers were to be tried by torture, tormenting superstitious [people] and great guslars shaved their hair first."). Here "kaci" is definitely used as an adjective from "kat" in the sense of "tormentor", and not "executioner", but still the meaning is literal.
- In another example, we can see contemporary usage in the figurative sense, but it's just a random quote from the internet, and a kind of poetry, so it may not adhere to the strict language rules: [74].
- Still, I believe "kaci" is just a standard creation of an adjective from a noun "kat", so there is no reason why we shouldn't use it in all possible senses. It's just rare, so it's hard to find examples. Olaf (talk) 10:29, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
- @Olaf Per our WT:CFI, each definition needs three examples, just just the entry as a whole. If the only definition is "of or relating to a executioner", we need three examples of that. Vininn126 (talk) 10:33, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
- I thought this discussion is about meaning of "kaci" as "of or relating to a tormentor", because "of or relating to an executioner" is already well confirmed with dictionaries. So here is the third quotation in which "kaci" is definitely used in a figurative sense: https://www.google.pl/books/edition/Wi%C4%99%C5%BA/m25IAQAAIAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=kaciego&dq=kaciego&printsec=frontcover Olaf (talk) 10:42, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
- @Hythonia As the lister. Vininn126 (talk) 10:46, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
- Two examples more:
- [75], look for "kacia": "Lecz czy dzielić się musiał wymiotem? Skąd ta wiedza, ta pewność kacia, ze stojąc pod płotem sam nie grzęźnie po uszki otulon swych projekcji błotem?" - refers to an unpleasant situation, but not an execution.
- [76], look for "kaciej", second item: "w pewnym momencie poczujesz bunt, potem nienawiść do swego krzywdziciela, a nawet chęć zemsty. Dążąc do ich realizacji "przyobleczesz szaty" kata, by w kolejnym żywocie odpłacić się temu człowiekowi za wszelkie krzywdy, jakie ci uczynił. Po pewnym okresie swej kaciej działalności może pojawić się poczucie winy."
- Olaf (talk) 11:00, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
- Two examples more:
- @Hythonia As the lister. Vininn126 (talk) 10:46, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
- I thought this discussion is about meaning of "kaci" as "of or relating to a tormentor", because "of or relating to an executioner" is already well confirmed with dictionaries. So here is the third quotation in which "kaci" is definitely used in a figurative sense: https://www.google.pl/books/edition/Wi%C4%99%C5%BA/m25IAQAAIAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=kaciego&dq=kaciego&printsec=frontcover Olaf (talk) 10:42, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
- (Sorry, this took a bit to type up, the reply interface lags a lot on this page.) @Olaf: Addressing the latter part, I was a bit unsure about this request, yeah. It is a rather standard derivative, so maybe the definition was fine like that? Still, I was slightly alarmed by the fact WSJP lists two definitions for kat ("executioner" and "tormentor"), whereas for kaci it specifies that it refers to the sense "executioner", so I felt that it's better to be safe than sorry.
- The latter two examples seem fine; the first, hm. It seems ambiguous? It might be employing the adjective, but given it speaks of what's happening during an execution, it seems more likely that it's a noun concord (i.e. two nouns -- kat zabobonnik in the singular -- because, like, there would assumedly be torturers present, and they'd be superstitious as well). I don't know if the Criteria for Inclusion would allow the second quote, but at the very least it's proof the word's used that way. Hythonia (talk) 11:08, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
- Oh, oops -- never mind. Hadn't seen your last comment prior to typing this up. Yeah, this looks like a closed case. Thank you. Hythonia (talk) 11:09, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
- @Olaf Per our WT:CFI, each definition needs three examples, just just the entry as a whole. If the only definition is "of or relating to a executioner", we need three examples of that. Vininn126 (talk) 10:33, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
- Discussion moved from Wiktionary:Requests for deletion/Non-English#یوگیہ.
Urdu. This word must be kept on! This word is found on Hindustani Dictionary. — This unsigned comment was added by গহীনঅরণ্য (talk • contribs) at 9:53, 24 April 2023 (UTC).
- @গহীনঅরণ্য: The original RFD nomination, which I have changed to RFV, says "Not Urdu. Transliteration of योग्य (yogya)." Urdu is only half of Hindustani, and it is not just Hindi spelled with a different script. We need to see evidence that this is used in Urdu, not just Hindi. Chuck Entz (talk) 10:44, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
May 2023
[edit]Thai. Unattested at all. No usage of the term is found anywhere. Google search returned no usage of this term. --YURi (talk) 20:19, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
- It is in the reference, p.85. ROYIN didn't add the word from the air. I agree it hard to find. I think it only appears in offline novels or movie dubs; it's a kind of dated term. --Octahedron80 (talk) 01:40, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Octahedron80 Thai is a WDL, so it needs at least three quotes to pass RFV. Could you add them so I can close this? Thadh (talk) 19:39, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
Turkish. Tagged by User:Xenos melophilos. Defined as a misspelling. As a standalone term it has more than three apparently citable uses. It's harder to tell if it is a rare misspelling (RFD material), common misspelling, or alternative form. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 20:47, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
- Verificated in kuantum. TDK is a government foundation and whatever it says is the official language. If the words taken from foreign languages are taken in a late period, TDK generally prefers to take their spelling close to the original. Quantum is already an academic word, we don't use it in our daily life. So, kuvantum can not be a dialect. It's a misspelling. We spell it kuantum and read this word as it is written. BurakD53 (talk) 22:30, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
- I think you're right about RFD. BurakD53 (talk) 22:37, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
German. Tagged by an IP editor but not listed. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 17:57, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
Low German. An IP editor requested verification of the past participles ebeennt and gebeennt in the inflection table. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 18:00, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
Low German. An IP editor requested verification of the past participles ebedüüdt and gebedüüdt in the inflection table. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 18:01, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
Low German or Low Saxon. The L2 says Low Saxon, the head template says Low German. Tagged by an IP editor but not listed. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 18:05, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
- nds = Low German (strict sense) = Low Saxon -- it all means the same. (nds-nl = Dutch Low German/Saxon has an addition.)
- gröyter (small g) is more likely, but still questionable. — This unsigned comment was added by 2003:DE:3724:F14:A8BC:6D10:5D61:B07A (talk).
Low German. Rfv-sense: "dog". Tagged by an IP editor who added a sense as an oblique form of Rüe (“dog”). Vox Sciurorum (talk) 18:07, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
Icelandic. Rfv-sense: industriousness. Tagged by @Numberguy6 but not listed. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 18:15, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
- Does exist but is just obsolete since the early 20th century. Does not exist in modern Icelandic. Examples:
- 130.208.182.103 07:15, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
Ukrainian. Rfv-sense: nowheresville. Tagged by User:Underfell Flowey, not listed. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 02:48, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
- At some stage the renaming caused a storm of memes in Ukrainian and Russian at some period but the sense is wrong, IMO. Google "Горішні Плавні мем" to see meme examples. Since the name sounded funny, someone may have assigned that meaning but I don't think it was anywhere widespread. — This unsigned comment was added by Atitarev (talk • contribs).
- Added three sources, I think it should be good now — NickK (talk) 01:25, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
Lithuanian. — Fenakhay (حيطي · مساهماتي) 18:41, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
Indonesian. Rfv-sense: eternal era. Tagged by User:Rex Aurorum years ago, not listed. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 16:02, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
Oriya. Tagged by an IP editor years ago with the comment "ṣô + nukta becoming /ɻ/ does not make sense". This may be meant as a request for verification of pronunciation /ɻɔ/. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 16:14, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
Turkish. Tagged by User:Afb2011. If it exists it might be spelled evreng, the Ottoman pronunciation given in {{R:tr:NewRedhouse}}. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 16:33, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
RFV label added by Kwekwlos, but not listed here. DonnanZ (talk) 21:53, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
South Levantine Arabic. Tagged by User:Fenakhay. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 16:27, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
- @Fenakhay: Deffo present in Jordan. Carrefour Jordan sells it. Something about fishing in Jordan, and a cooking show, although this is some nice Modern Standard Arabic the girl is talking; it is generally correct to assume terms for flora and fauna to belong to either literary language or dialect if found in one unless there is contrary evidence. My search is
"الجمبري" "الأردن", as Jordan is between Egyptian and Hijazi Arabic where it is used because of influence from Egyptian Arabic; apparently here borrowed from Egyptian into Jordanian phonology, hence unexpected /d͡ʒ/. Fay Freak (talk) 16:45, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
- Looks expanded and referenced. Fay Freak (talk) 21:41, 26 July 2025 (UTC)
Proto-Brythonic. It's a given name attested in the inscription PATERN[--] COLI AVI FICIT ARTOGNOU COL[I] FICIT, which is Latin, which strongly suggests this is a Latin transcription of a Proto-Brythonic name, and not a Proto-Brythonic term in its own right. By comparison, the reconstructed form would be *Arθgnọw.
I should note that this has been RFV'd before ([77] - discussion here), but the notice was removed after 2 days with the baffling reasoning that it is attested, without actually addressing the fact that the dispute is over which language it's actually attested in. Can we please clear this up once and for all? Theknightwho (talk) 16:42, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
Proto-Brythonic. According to the etymology, it's attested in a Koine Greek text as a transcription of a Proto-Brythonic given name. Same issue as #Artognou and #Uindiorix, in that the attestation makes it a Koine Greek term (which we group under Ancient Greek), and not a Proto-Brythonic term. Theknightwho (talk) 17:50, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
South Levantine Arabic. More seafood skepticism from User:Fenakhay. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 17:37, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
- An IP editor removed the RFV template and added a reference in [78]. South Levantine Arabic is an LDL, so one mention should be enough. —Granger (talk · contribs) 08:29, 24 September 2025 (UTC)
Pali. Rfv-sense: seventh
Sattha (“seventh”) looks like a typo to me. --RichardW57 (talk) 00:17, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
- Delete --RichardW57 (talk) 14:04, 1 July 2023 (UTC)
- I've traced the spelling with the aspiration back to Duroiselle's A Practical Grammar of the Pāli Language, Third edition, 1921. Paragraph 251 gives the form as 'sattha', while Paragraph 275 gives it as unaspirated satta. I suspect interference from adjacent chaṭṭha (“sixth”) and aṭṭhama (“eighth”); their underdotting in the text has to be taken on faith - it is not visible in the scan of the original. --RichardW57m (talk) 09:46, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
Dutch. Rfv-sense: "testicle".
WNT gives one mention, but that's about it for now. Thadh (talk) 12:05, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
Malayalam. — Fenakhay (حيطي · مساهماتي) 16:50, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
- I have added gloss for given name [79]. Vis M (talk) 19:14, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
Malayalam. — Fenakhay (حيطي · مساهماتي) 16:51, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
- It was the spelling for എപ്പോൾ (eppōḷ) in older works.s:ml:Page:CiXIV40.pdf/125, s:ml:Page:CiXIV133.pdf/546, and several others.
- I think I created this entry by mistake while sourcing missing lemmas from older works, and then realized the mistake and immediately added the archaic label. Vis M (talk) 19:03, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
- @Vis M, The dictionary seems to transcribe all ō and ē as o/e as in വെഗം, എന്നെക്കും, ഇനിമെൽ, തൊറും, തലെന്നാൾ, ദ്രൊഹം, could be a Grantha feature though im not sure whether the early Malayalam script really lacked distinction between ō/o, ē/e? also transcribing the kuttiyalukaram as unmarked though that was common before AleksiB 1945 (talk) 09:55, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
Pali. Hiatus is odd, especially given its absence in the claimed antonym. @Felfeu: Where's this word been seen? --RichardW57 (talk) 21:16, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
- Maybe this is obvious, but the hiatus is because both parts of the compound are negated, not just the first. I dont know this language ... would an ā normally swallow a following a, even if that /a/ is a very important morpheme? —Soap— 14:53, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
- Keep Some of the X-not-X compounds have looked very unclear, but I forgot the first rule - try Google. I've now found seemingly good quotations and will put at least one of them up tonight. --RichardW57m (talk) 15:28, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
- @soap: It's an SoP (as in the looming German/Swedish/Sanskrit problem) and coal mine mess! First durable source hyphenates, and also hyphenates the feminine form of the positive, but not the neuter form of the positive. --RichardW57m (talk) 16:30, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
- This is RFV, not RFD. Theknightwho (talk) 18:59, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
- @Soap: I misread the accusative of the feminine form as a neuter form. The Sinhala script version has the phrase or whatever as a single word, so we now have quotes for one word in the Sinhala script, and for hyphenated and two words in the Roman script. They're not independent. --RichardW57 (talk) 00:12, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
- @soap: It's an SoP (as in the looming German/Swedish/Sanskrit problem) and coal mine mess! First durable source hyphenates, and also hyphenates the feminine form of the positive, but not the neuter form of the positive. --RichardW57m (talk) 16:30, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
- Keep Some of the X-not-X compounds have looked very unclear, but I forgot the first rule - try Google. I've now found seemingly good quotations and will put at least one of them up tonight. --RichardW57m (talk) 15:28, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
- Is this word associated with a specific religious or philosophical tradition? If so, it should probably be labeled.__Gamren (talk) 12:14, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
- @Gamren: If you're up to identifying the tradition, go ahead and label it. I'd be tempted to say it's a Buddhist term, but for all I know it might just be a Theravadin concept. It might not Sanskritise well. --RichardW57m (talk) 12:51, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
- I don't know anything about this topic.__Gamren (talk) 14:53, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
- @Gamren: If you're up to identifying the tradition, go ahead and label it. I'd be tempted to say it's a Buddhist term, but for all I know it might just be a Theravadin concept. It might not Sanskritise well. --RichardW57m (talk) 12:51, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
Pali.
Even an LDL needs some evidence of existence for its words. Can find no evidence of this noun in Pali. --RichardW57 (talk) 21:45, 30 May 2023 (UTC)
- Well, it's got two descendants listed at the bottom of the चतुरङ्ग page. Would these two be better explained as direct loans from Sanskrit? —Soap— 09:24, 4 June 2023 (UTC)
- It works - dating of the loans would help. The compilers of Thailand's Royal Institute Dictionary gave up on trying to decide whether words were borrowed from Sanskrit or Pali. In this instance, I think borrowing via Thai would also be possible. The word exists in Thai, though not on Wiktionary. The homonymous adjective in Pali has a ghostly existence - it can be seen as an intermediate element of compounds, but is also borderline SoP. --RichardW57 (talk) 10:35, 4 June 2023 (UTC)
Pali. Rfv-sense: 'spur'
Dictionaries record patoda (“goad, spur”). --RichardW57m (talk) 12:29, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
June 2023
[edit]Pali. Rfv-sense: an ascetic forest-dwelling
Put simply, what evidence do we have that this was (or is) used as a noun in Pali?--RichardW57m (talk) 13:00, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
Pali. Rfv-sense: to say
Both vacati and vatti appear to be grammarians' fancies, and Childers writes, "Saddiníti gives the present forms vatti and vacati, neither of which I have yet met with in texts, vadati in Pali being generally substituted for the present of वच्."[1].
Geiger makes no reference to vatti in his discussion of athematic verbs. In his grammar, Thomas Oberlies uses the expression '(*)vatti' to refer to the forms from the stem vac. Neither grammar makes any mention of vacati.
As the Saddiníti refers to them, there may be some merit in fashioning an explanation of the terms on Wiktionary. (Note that Oberlies' usage is in English.) --RichardW57 (talk) 17:13, 3 June 2023 (UTC)
- @Apisite Please note that I've sent vacati / vatti to RfV. RichardW57 (talk) 17:29, 3 June 2023 (UTC)
References
[edit]- ^ Childers, Robert Caesar, Dictionary of the Päli language, London: Trübner & Company, 1875, page 559.
Pali. Rfv-sense: to say.
To be considered with the above (vacati). --RichardW57 (talk) 17:22, 3 June 2023 (UTC)
Burmese.
The on-line version of the dictionary has a different spelling, သန္ဒေ. Is that also correct, or perhaps a common misspelling? I'm breaking the hard link for a Pali word form; someone else (e.g @Hintha) will have to add Burmese သန္ဒေ (sande) if such a word exists. --RichardW57 (talk) 11:31, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
- SEALANG erroneously spells the word as သန္ဒေ (sande), likely due to a clerical error when digitising the Myanmar Language Commission's dictionary's contents. Other dictionaries, including my paper copy of the 2012 Tet Toe English-Myanmar Mini-Dictionary (p. 296), corroborate the သန္ဓေ (sandhe) form. -Hintha (talk) 20:13, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
- Can you please record the relevant dictionary definition. The best I could do was to find the word on p996 of Judson, where it merely says 'See ပဋိသန္ဓေ', which doesn't read to me as meaning 'means the same as'.
- I don't understand how, within Burmese, ပဋိသန္ဓေ (pa.ti.sandhe) can be derived from Burmese သန္ဓေ (sandhe) if that is borrowed from Pali paṭisandhi. --RichardW57 (talk) 21:42, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
Burmese.
Compound of သန္ဓေ and shares the samme attestation problem. --RichardW57 (talk) 12:20, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
- Keep Fixed by finding entry in Judson and removing link to MED. I've taken the liberty of removing the invocation of
{{rfv}}. --RichardW57 (talk) 21:33, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
Burmese.
Compound of သန္ဓေ and shares the samme attestation problem. --RichardW57 (talk) 12:20, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
Burmese. There is also a hard redirect to this page. --RichardW57 (talk) 12:14, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
Compound of သန္ဓေ and shares the samme attestation problem. --RichardW57 (talk) 12:20, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
Old English. I'm unaware of any attestations of this verb outside of the past participle ġefylċed, which is attested sufficiently late that it could represent a vowel-reduced form of ġefylċod, the expected participle of the class 2 weak verb fylċian. This seems probable, as class 2 verbs tend to oust class 1 ones in late Old English; even if the verb was inherited from Proto-West Germanic *fulkijan (which is far from certain), it could've changed class at some point. 2407:7000:942C:8000:4B9:8AE8:9E3D:8FC4 03:56, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
- I understand what you're saying, but likewise, fylċian is only attested once, also late (1066, same year as above) as fylċade. How then do we know which is right ? Odds are 50:50. At least fylċan (wk1) has reflexes outside of Old English (OHG & ON), which fylċian does not. Leasnam (talk) 17:27, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
- Discussion moved from Wiktionary:Requests for deletion/Others#Appendix:Toki Pona/teje.
Toki Pona. Tagged by User:LesVisages (diff) but not listed. — Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 00:51, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
- Shouldn't this be an RFV issue? Though not sure how that works for Appendix-only languages. AG202 (talk) 01:38, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
- Sent to RFV since the only reason given by the tagger was "WT:ATTEST". — excarnateSojourner (talk · contrib) 21:48, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
- There is one cite given. Thadh (talk) 22:43, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
- Where? CitationsFreak: Accessed 2023/01/01 (talk) 21:19, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
- In the usage note. Thadh (talk) 21:33, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
- Where? CitationsFreak: Accessed 2023/01/01 (talk) 21:19, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
- There is one cite given. Thadh (talk) 22:43, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
- Sent to RFV since the only reason given by the tagger was "WT:ATTEST". — excarnateSojourner (talk · contrib) 21:48, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
- Let's be clear on what the policy (WT:CFI#Constructed languages) says: We need one use in a durably-archived work for this to pass. (The cite given in the usage note is a reference to a dictionary, so not a use.) In practice, given the scant physical publications in this language, it means agreeing to accept online-only sources (theoretically one, but in practice several) if they can be found. This, that and the other (talk) 10:13, 28 March 2025 (UTC)
The antonym. Also listed at RFDO, with comment "the word is very rare (i've never seen it outside of comprehensive lists)". I'm putting it as a subsection because I suspect the two entries will live or die together. This, that and the other (talk) 10:13, 28 March 2025 (UTC)
July 2023
[edit]Rumai Palaung.
Use needs to be verified, and the definition confirmed. --RichardW57m (talk) 09:08, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
- Keep. I've added the blindingly obvious quotation, and moved the difficult part of the definition to the headword, where it's unchallengeable (but unprotected). --RichardW57m (talk) 09:38, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
- That's not an instance of use, and in any case IMO we don't need a quotation, just a definition. If the article does not contain a definition, it should be deleted until someone comes along who wants to create actual content.
- Actually, with my correction the article is still only marginal (rather than outright false, as it was when I found it), though it should ideally have enough content to be minimally informative to the reader. The link to the Unicode proposal at least gives them something to follow up on if they want an actual definition, so I removed the 'deletion' tag. kwami (talk) 23:13, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
- Well, it is an instance of use, and here it is in more detail:
- A letter used in Rumai Palaung.
- 2005, (some Rumai Palaung reader); reproduced in Michael Everson, Martin Hosken, Proposal for encoding Myanmar characters for Shan and Palaung in the UCS[80], 2006, Figure 5:
- စလာဘိုးပဒီး ဟာဝ်းလာဝ်ႈႎစာန်းတိုက့် ...
- (please add an English translation of this quotation)
- A letter used in Rumai Palaung.
- Or do you have some reason for denying that it was an instance of use? I take it you did look at Figure 5.
- Transcribing that text in a language I don't know in an alphabet I'm not acquainted with is hard going.
- This entry has been made the subject of an RfV, so unless we accept 'clearly widespread use', and you clearly didn't before, we need a quotation or a suitable mention. --RichardW57m (talk) 14:36, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
- Well, it is an instance of use, and here it is in more detail:
Mon.
Keep. The vowel letter blatantly obviously exists. I shouldn't have had to waste my time adding quotations. @Kwamikagami would have got a strong hint of that from even a glance at WT:About Mon. Incidentally, for the sake of a letter lemma, I don't why we have to worry about how it's pronounced. --RichardW57m (talk) 14:30, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
- @RichardW57m It's not whether the letter exists, but whether the article has any content. Spurious articles should be deleted, regardless of whether a good article could be written. If the article apple only said "Translingual: a word spelled a-p-p-l-e," then that article should be deleted regardless of the fact that we could craft a legitimate article on that word. Or, you could be the one to add lexical content, if you like. But it does no harm to not have a spurious article, and IMO it's better that way: when people see all the red links, someone may be inspired to create actual, informative articles on these letters.
- BTW, I never said you needed to add quotations. At the very least, identify the language or languages. The pronunciation would also be nice, though not strictly necessary.
- As for why I'm doing this, I've found Wikt articles on supposed letters that apparently don't exist in any language. Not many, but a few. And I've found hundreds more that have fake definitions or empty definitions that don't actually provide any information. That makes Wiktionary look like a joke. kwami (talk) 21:51, 12 July 2023 (UTC)
- @Kwamikagami: were you aware that
{{rfdef}}exists? You're deleting entries because they lack adequate definitions when you could be tagging them with{{rfdef}}and a hidden note explaining what would constitute an adequate definition. Flooding CAT:D with trivial single-character entries that admins don't know and don't care about is annoying and rather disruptive. I'm certainly not going to waste my time on them. Chuck Entz (talk) 03:07, 13 July 2023 (UTC)- That would be fine for missing definitions. But these are bogus articles. I would delete them myself if I were able to.
- I got started with emoji articles that were nothing more than the Unicode definition, or what the emoji happened to look like in a particular font. Consensus was that such spurious articles should be deleted.
- I've been criticized for removing false information and then tagging the article for deletion. But often once the false information is removed, there's nothing left. What exactly am I supposed to tag with {rfdef}? In many cases we don't even know what language uses the letter. In other cases we don't know if the letter is used in any orthography. I suppose I could replace the entry with an "Undetermined" header and then tag that with {rfdef}, but that seems rather ridiculous -- what definition would we expect for an undetermined language?
- There are editors who are willing to delete bogus articles -- it's not like it takes any effort. But they've stopped when criticized for deleting spurious or unverified claims. Why not just delete any article that doesn't meet Wiktionary standards, and leave it to someone who actually has some information to recreate it? kwami (talk) 03:19, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
- @Kwamikagami, Chuck Entz: Because when recreating a page, one needs to know why the article was deleted, and not everyone can see the reason.
- We do need to find some way of getting the
{{rfdef}}s addressed. I don't know how to manage the nagging. --RichardW57m (talk) 16:34, 14 July 2023 (UTC)- That's not reason to post misinformation on Wiktionary. kwami (talk) 01:40, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
- @Kwamikagami: were you aware that
Translingual. RfV was raised at entry by User:Kwamikagami, who neglected to create an entry here. --RichardW57m (talk) 16:26, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
- Corrupt entries like this should of course just be fixed or deleted, but RichardW57m is edit-warring over imposing a Burmese-nationalist bias on Wikt, so better for a third party to fix it.
- RichardW57m was instructed, when he asked about this issue at the Beer Parlor, that the translingual header is for translingual entries, and that individual languages belong under their own headers. Yet he insists that Burmese does not belong under a language header, but should be presented as some kind of translingual entity, and that all other languages of Burma are secondary to it. I've tried fixing, e.g. by changing the 'translingual' header to 'Burmese', but RichardW57m reverts that and complains I am 'deleting' the entry. He also deletes Burmese entries as 'redundant'. (Somehow deleting Burmese does not count as 'deleting'.) I've fixed 'Burmese alphabet' (which RichardW57m intends specifically as the alphabet of the burmese language, not as the translingual Mon-Burmese script -- this isn't a matter of him being confused by the name) to the translingual Mon-Burmese script (arguably it's actually the Mon script), but RichardW57m reverts it back to his favored language, arguing that the Burmese alphabet is representative of the Mon script and so should be presented instead. There's also the problem that Mon, Shan, Karen etc. are not pronounced as Burmese. In this single case he has made the grudging concession of labeling the pronunciation as 'Burmese', but of course it should still be moved to a Burmese header. He's also called for me to be banned for opposing his nationalist bias, which has no business dictating the format of Wikt. kwami (talk) 18:54, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
- The likes of Translingual i (letter) are defined by reference to well-known alphabets; the current and early definition of th (vowel) letter are by reference to a well-known alphabet. (He appears to be frustrated that the Mons were definitively defeated by the Burmese after attempting to assimilate the Burmese, so that Burmese culture is better known to English speakers than Mon culture.)
- There is currently a moratorium on editing one-character letters, such as this, so here is evidence of translinguality:
- As for the history, I contend that simply undoing an improper edit is perfectly reasonable - @Kwamikagami had replaced 'translingual' by 'Burmese' without raising an
{{rfm}}or anything suitable. If he had simply added a Burmese language section for a letter, I would not have changed his edit except perhaps for uncontroversial edits, such as fixing typos or supplying omitted items. RichardW57 (talk) 20:59, 21 July 2023 (UTC)- Keep. (I was interrupted by a computer problem).
- As to the matter of citing pronunciations, that is something that can be improved. We are slowly discussing it in Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2023/July#Pronunciation Labelling in Translingual Items, where on 15 July @Kwamikagami conceded, "If under 'translingual' you wanted to give the pronunciation of the various languages that use the letter, that would be technically correct, but that's why we have sections for individual languages." The discussion is moving to the notion of focussing on abstract sounds, and not using sound clips at all, which tend to be cluttered by irrelevant details of individual languages. --RichardW57 (talk) 21:30, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
- I fixed the transliteration of the Burmese; it was part of the edits lost by my computer problem. --RichardW57 (talk) 09:26, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
Thai. Rfv-sense: because
Does this actually occur in some Central Thai dialect, or is this merely an echo of its existence in the Northern Thai and North-eastern Thai languages? We have no source, explicit or implicit for this sense, a practice some have tried to ban. (Notifying Alifshinobi, Octahedron80, YURi, Judexvivorum, หมวดซาโต้, Atitarev, GinGlaep, Noktonissian): . This sense was added by @21janvier1793, who has not edited for over a year. --RichardW57 (talk) 12:16, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
- I could not find the reference to support it. In fact, I don't think Central Thai dialect ever use this word in that sense. Even in the contemporary Northern Thai, the use of this word to mean "because" is rare. I think the user @21janvier1793 put the meaning here because he misunderstood that Isaan was a dialect of Central Thai. Noktonissian (talk) 13:18, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
- Does anyone feel up to writing the Isaan entry? I wasn't up to translating the examples I could find. It looks as though the simple word is both preposition and conjunction, though Becker just gives ย้อนว่า (in Lao script) as the conjunction. --RichardW57 (talk) 14:39, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
- I do not think the meaning "because" belongs here. พจนานุกรมฉบับราชบัณฑิตยสถาน does not mention this meaning. I think we should remove it. --A.S. (talk) 13:33, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
- In view of Noktonissian's opinion and the lack of support for this word, and to stop this RfV stalling for timidity - Delete. --RichardW57m (talk) 12:48, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
Paiwan. This language does not appear to use the letter f: see a long text at [81]. The phoneme v is apparently used, so it is possible that different orthographies exist. The word alofo (with lowercase) may belong to a different Taiwanese indigenous language, such as Amis. This, that and the other (talk) 11:58, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
- This resource about the Amis language glosses ’alofo as 背袋 (“backpack”). This, that and the other (talk) 12:01, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
Undetermined. Having deleted the entry for the Chinese upper case 'letter', @Kwamikagami added the tag {{rfv}} with the explanation, 'Lacking a language orthography'. Now if Yoruba ǹ (letter) is valid, we need a good explanation as to why the corresponding capital does not exist or is not translingual. Incidentally, Translingual ǹ (symbol) existed until @Kwamikagami deleted it out of process on 2 June 2023. --RichardW57m (talk) 12:39, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
Welsh. This is certainly a proper noun used as a house and farm name[[w:Mathafarn]|but I can't find any record of it as a common noun, specifically in Geiriadur Prifysgol Cymru. Llusiduonbach] (talk) 16:29, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
August 2023
[edit]Albanian. The dialectal variation of mb- ~ mp- is plausible. Catonif (talk) 09:26, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
Paiwan. Tagged 2 years ago by @Mar vin kaiser: "not found in official Ministry of Education dictionary". Created in 2009 by @Qehath, who is still around. This, that and the other (talk) 10:54, 11 August 2023 (UTC)
- Found it in this dictionary (PACIFIC LINGUISTICS Series C - No. 73 PAIWAN DICTIONARY, Raleigh Ferrell, 1982; pg. 23 and elsewhere). MSG17 (talk) 03:35, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
Eastern Huasteca Nahuatl. The entry saw participation from @Aearthrise, Marrovi in 2018 and 2020. Note that the Western Huasteca Nahuatl entry was removed out of process. This, that and the other (talk) 02:09, 12 August 2023 (UTC)
Belarusian. Belarusians may occasionally use this word in their Russian speech, but I doubt that it can be considered a proper Belarusian word. The synonyms of this word exist in Belarusian dictionaries, so it's not vulgar enough to be excluded from dictionaries on the basis of being vulgar. And yet the Belarusian dictionaries don't seem to have "жопа". Ssvb (talk) 16:46, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
- @Ssvb: Hi. The Belarusian entry was added by me. It can be marked as rare or "Russianism". The more common synonym ду́па (dúpa) is listed under synonyms. It was possible to find usage in Belarusian. Folklore: "Ах, мілка мая, вярці жопаю, як я. Стара будзеш — пазабудзеш, вярцець жопаю не будзеш." Another usage: "Раптам бачу, круцяць міма нас жопамі".
- More common vulgar forms like "пайшла ў жопу!". It is verifiable in different forms, if someone wants to keep it.
- I don't mind keeping Belarusian less contaminated by Russian, though, if it's decided to delete the entry. I am neutral but remember we describe the language the way it is, not the way we want it to be. Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 08:34, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
- RFV-failed. The discussion has been open for more than a month (2 years, in fact), so I believe I can close it.
- Addressing the question of “keeping Belarusian less contaminated by Russian”: the real issue here is not “how we what Belarusian to be“, but “do we consider this Belarusian?”. Is a Russian word inside Belarusian a code-switching (and needs to be described in Russian part of the dictionary) or a borrowing (and can be considered a part of Belarusian)? The lines are often blurred.
- The issue is not unique to Belarusian, it’s relevant for any language whose community is bilingual. For example, Tatar. Let’s take a common Russian word and try finding it in a Tatar text:
- 2006 August 4, ANGDOR, Udaff.online[82], archived from the original on 6 November 2025:
- Синен хуйня читать итмим.
- [Синең хуйня читать итмим.]
- Sinjen xujnja čitatʹ itmim.
- I’m not reading your shit.
- 2008, Хәбир Ибраһим [Xäbir İbrahim], “Әйбәт! (Бер яшь егет монологы)”, in Ялгыз тәкәрлек : роман, повестьлар, хикәяләр, Qazan: Татарстан китап нәшрияты, →ISBN:
- Төнге унбер җиткәнче, газета читать итә.
- Tönge unber citkänçe, ğäzeta çitatʹ itä.
- Until 11 pm he is reading a newspaper.
- 2021 March 18, Juli Ibragim, “Ильсия Бадретдинова”, in VK.com[83], archived from the original on 6 November 2025:
- Ильсөянең рэп читать итергә исәбе бар быгай😎
- İlʹsöyäneñ rep çitatʹ itergä isäbe bar bığay😎
- Looks like Ilsöyä has a reason for performing rap 😎
- I’ve found 3 entries. It formally fulfils WT:CFI. So, should we add Tatar читать (çitatʹ) or читать итү (çitatʹ itü) as a synonym of уку (uqu)? The problem is, basically any Russian word can be borrowed into Belarusian or Tatar this way (since almost all speakers are bilingual). Do we really need a copy of Russian dictionary in Tatar and Belarusian sections of Wiktionary?
- In the Belarusian section, our answer is “no, we don’t want this”. This answer is codified in Wiktionary:Belarusian entry guidelines#Criteria for inclusion. Therefore, I think it’s safe to declare this as a failed verification request. Хтосьці (talk) 15:01, 6 November 2025 (UTC)
- @Хтосьці: A few comments. I added this RFV a long time ago, when I was just a beginner here. The WT:ABE#Criteria for inclusion is not an official policy. Right now it's just a draft written by me to fill the void. It can be challenged and changed if necessary. As for the word itself, I feel like its attestability might be similar to the attestability of the English term amigo. --Ssvb (talk) 16:43, 6 November 2025 (UTC)
- The difference between amigo and жопа is that most English speakers do not, in fact, know Spanish or Portuguese. So when a Spanish or Portuguese word enters English, it's a rare situation worthy of description.
- Almost all Belarusian speakers, on the other hand, know Russian, so the bar is much lower. Russian words in Belarusian are a daily occurence, and I don't see much value in documenting it.
- However if you want to challenge my decision to remove жопа, feel free to undo my changes. I just wanted to close a RFV because no one seems to close them and they just seem to rot forever, which is IMHO not ideal. Хтосьці (talk) 17:55, 6 November 2025 (UTC)
- @Хтосьці: A few comments. I added this RFV a long time ago, when I was just a beginner here. The WT:ABE#Criteria for inclusion is not an official policy. Right now it's just a draft written by me to fill the void. It can be challenged and changed if necessary. As for the word itself, I feel like its attestability might be similar to the attestability of the English term amigo. --Ssvb (talk) 16:43, 6 November 2025 (UTC)
Sanskrit.
The word is not found in Google for any language, not just absent as Sanskrit ᠱᠷᠢᠢ (šrii). Notifying @AleksiB 1945, Theknightwho, (Notifying AryamanA, Bhagadatta, Svartava, JohnC5, Kutchkutch, Inqilābī, Getsnoopy, Rishabhbhat, Dragonoid76): . --11:31, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
- @RichardW57 Neither are several of the other scripts given. Why are you only RFV’ing this one? If you’re only doing it because you disagree with the move to use the conventional Mongolian I instead of the Galik one, then I should point out that exactly the same issue applies to that version as well. It seems very clear to me that it would be more productive to get rid of the automatic Sanskrit alternative generator instead of these sorts of piecemeal nominations, wouldn’t you agree? Theknightwho (talk) 04:10, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
- Also this can be found in 《同文韻統》 volume 1, page 137, column 5, which can be verified by cross-comparison with Tibetan-script ཤྲཱི (shrī) in the top row. Below are Manchu-script ᡧᡵᡳᡳ (šrii) and Mongolian-script ᠱᠷᠢᠢ (šrii). Theknightwho (talk) 05:00, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
- @Theknightwho: Good, could you please add the dictionary (?) mention. --RichardW57 (talk) 21:21, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
- @Theknightwho: A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.
- In this particular case, we can now read the word as hand-written, and attempt to work out what is actually written. And here we also get mentions for Manchu and Tibetan for free from your example.
- After seeing @AleksiB 1945's confession at WT:GP, I realised there was a whole bunch of unsupported transliterations to investigate.
- While the automated generation of alternative forms tends not to be trustworthy, it does seem to be more trustworthy than the equivalent manual generation of red links, and is better than having private code generating wikitext that is then pasted in manually. And continual improvement is available for automatic generation. I do however see false blue (only orange if one's logged in and has so chosen) links as a reputational problem. One solution for them pending the location of evidence is
{{no entry}}. --RichardW57 (talk) 22:18, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
- Also this can be found in 《同文韻統》 volume 1, page 137, column 5, which can be verified by cross-comparison with Tibetan-script ཤྲཱི (shrī) in the top row. Below are Manchu-script ᡧᡵᡳᡳ (šrii) and Mongolian-script ᠱᠷᠢᠢ (šrii). Theknightwho (talk) 05:00, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
Telugu, as mentioned in the deletion summary, no results in CPB or Andhra Bharati repo, not found on internet or gbooks, Tamil Lexicon and Burrow (DEDR [2910]) don't identify any Telugu cognate; it is specifically a South Dravidian word, is not even loaned to Telugu and Telugu doesnt have the phoneme /ɲ/, the word is a literal transliteration from Tamil ஞாயிறு (ñāyiṟu). AleksiB 1945 (talk) 09:35, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
- @AleksiB 1945 I agree I can't find any attestation of it. However I don't understand why it redirects to a Malayalam word now? Shouldn't it be redirected? Also, @Getsnoopy is the page creator, can you clarify why you created this entry? Brusquedandelion (talk) 11:56, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- @AleksiB 1945 It's in CPB. And Telugu most definitely has the /ɲ/ phoneme, which is why ఞ exists. As for the redirect, I also am confused as to why a Telugu term redirects to a Malayalam term. I've noticed that you've made quite a few such changes that are incorrect without consensus; please do not do that and get consensus on the talk pages first.
- @Brusquedandelion I created it because (a) it is attested, and (b) to show the etymology of the term పడమర. Getsnoopy (talk) 23:41, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- >No results found for ఞాయిరు
- >No results found for ఞాయిఱు
- >Telugu most definitely has the /ɲ/ phoneme, which is why ఞ exists.
- ౡ also prob exists for the same reason, it is phonemic because of a single sanskrit loanword ञ (ña)
- >without consensus
- this discussion above has been open for over 7 months, another one for 11 months
- >to show the etymology of the term పడమర
- CP Brown who knew Tamil was giving an analogical explanation from the Malayalam word for west paḍiññāṟŭ which is from paḍum+ñāyaṟŭ. It is not about the Telugu word's etymology itself. The original cognate of ñāyaṟu isnt there in Telugu as the word is restricted to SD1, apart form that ñāyaṟŭ cannot become -mara. Just because the etym of a word isnt known doesn't mean whatever etym should be entered AleksiB 1945 (talk) 20:54, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
September 2023
[edit]Sanskrit.
Distinctly implausible given Sinhalese spelling ශ්රී (śrī). If no defence of this spelling can be provided, I recommend that this page simply be deleted, rather than converted to an invocation of {{no entry|sa}}.
This entry was perpetrated by @AleksiB 1945. Unfortunately, we have too little Sinhala-script Sanskrit text to constructively test the behaviour of Module:sa-convert, which originally perpetrated this spelling. --RichardW57 (talk) 05:59, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
- ශ්රී looks like an improperly rendered version of ශ්රී, the url shows it as "ශ්%E2%80%8Dරී" and both use the same letters just that the middle "%E2%80%8D" makes the first one a ligature it seems AleksiB 1945 (talk) 09:51, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
- @AleksiB 1945: Yes, that's the spelling difference. Sinhalese mostly forms consonant clusters using ⟨0DCA⟩, the visible al lakuna - strictly speaking, killed consonant plus normal consonant with vowels: Pali mostly, or at least traditionally, forms consonant clusters using ⟨200D 0DCA⟩ - touching letters: Sanskrit seems to mostly form them using full-blown conjuncts ⟨0DCA 200D⟩, but I'm not sure whether it (i.e. the user) falls back to touching letters - to be researched. Additionally, some of the conjuncts seem to be repurposed for prenasalised consonants, and have indecomposable Unicode encodings for when used for that purpose. Just to complicate matters, it seems that Pali and Sinhala mostly use the full-blown conjunct encodings for clusters with 'r' or with 'y' in second place. There are at least seven combinations besides those ending in 'y' and 'r' for which Pali uses 'conjuncts' rather than touching letters. Some of these combinations are to be found in contractions rather than normal words, where they have been almost or mostly assimilated away, e.g. -kv- (no words, I think) and -nv- (only one verb and its compounds that I am sure of).
- Oh, and there's the complication that the Windows font Nirmala UI supports neither touching letters nor full-blown conjuncts not used by Pali, so it falls back to visible al-lakuna. At least Windows now puts the preposed vowels and vowel fragments after the al-lakuna following the first consonant.
- Finally, the Sinhalese users of Sanskrit in Sinhala script are distinctly a minority - Devanagari has mostly taken over in Sri Lanka. --RichardW57m (talk) 13:40, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
- you should workout with Module:sa-convert#Example, as for the Mlym script it seems the chillus/dot reph are used but not the anusvara for final m as in Malayalam or the chillu m, instead മ് is used; also ive heard some saying word final t/d, ṭ/ḍ are represented with chillu l and ḷ but that might be a Malayalam only thing (not used in the samples either). Samples: 1, 2 AleksiB 1945 (talk) 11:17, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
- @AleksiB 1945: What we need to do is to populate the testcases, and that needs people to work from Sanskrit texts in the relevant scripts. In some cases, e.g. Sinhala, the examples are almost useless for checking because we lack the fonts to read them properly. (Notifying AryamanA, Bhagadatta, Svartava, JohnC5, Kutchkutch, Inqilābī, Getsnoopy, Rishabhbhat, Dragonoid76): . I've got two pieces of Sanskrit in Sinhala script, and the chances of my misreading them are very high. My best chances are with the text at the foot of p26 of https://www.aathaapi.net/tipitaka/28.OTSPKN_Khuddaka_Patha.pdf, and I don't know what type of Sanskrit it is - it could be Buddhist Hybrid Sanskrit for all I know. At least I seem to have a Pali translation of that text in the verses above. --RichardW57m (talk) 13:21, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
- You are aware, are you not, that Module:sa-convert#Example is generated by the module? --RichardW57m (talk) 13:21, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
- Beware of the Sanskrit Bible on the Internet. It is automatically generated from a Devanagari master, and is only as trustworthy as their conversion code. I've found one version with a couple of sibilants swapped round! --RichardW57m (talk) 13:21, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
- The first sample may be better; they are aware of the presence of pitfalls - "We are aware of the limitations of this automatic conversion from one language script to the other". --RichardW57m (talk) 13:21, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
- Module:sa-convert/testcases/Sinhala demonstrates 3 failures out of 11, and that's working from a lower bar - that the Devanagari and Sinhala have the same Roman transliteration. Basically, we either have a very modern spelling, well under a century old, or the transliteration to Sinhala is deeply wrong. I believe it is deeply wrong. I'm disinclined to fix that detected bug until I can fix other bugs I've seen that are not amenable to automatic conversion. --RichardW57m (talk) 13:21, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
- you should workout with Module:sa-convert#Example, as for the Mlym script it seems the chillus/dot reph are used but not the anusvara for final m as in Malayalam or the chillu m, instead മ് is used; also ive heard some saying word final t/d, ṭ/ḍ are represented with chillu l and ḷ but that might be a Malayalam only thing (not used in the samples either). Samples: 1, 2 AleksiB 1945 (talk) 11:17, 30 August 2023 (UTC)
Sylheti. Etymology section is confusing. This term may be from Sanskrit नारिकेल but couldn't find few listed Cognates (empty page) in नारिकेल#Descendants. Requesting for verification. Thanks -- ꠢꠣꠍꠘ ꠞꠣꠎꠣ (talk) 08:43, 10 September 2023 (UTC)
- What is this supposed to verify? RFV is for disputing whether a term exists, not whether an etymology is correct. — SURJECTION / T / C / L / 12:31, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
Sanskrit.
Let's see the epigraphic evidence. No entry on Google books for the Brahmi script form. — This unsigned comment was added by RichardW57 (talk • contribs).
Belatedly signed. --RichardW57 (talk) 18:38, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
Mon. Rfv-sense: 'school' as a meaning in Thailand. Halliday[1] gives its meaning as "a monastery, a school (in Burma only)". Now, the Thai Mon entry แพฺ-อา by @Octahedron80 does give 'school' as a meaning, but without any source. This could have been inherited from ဘာ when he split the Thai Mon entry off.
Signed belatedly, repinging @Octahedron80. --RichardW57 (talk) 18:36, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
- The reference is [2][3][4]. It is because a wat is traditionally also used as school, so the sense is imported into Mon too. Today, it still exists. --Octahedron80 (talk) 01:38, 25 September 2023 (UTC)
- Did Anusorn add (or subtract) something to the entry in the translation[3]? The entry in Edition 2 is the same as in the original[1]. I can't locate the text of other references you added[2][4]. What do they say about the word? (Exact text, please.) --RichardW57 (talk) 22:42, 25 September 2023 (UTC) RichardW57 (talk) 22:42, 25 September 2023 (UTC)
- The sense development is plausible, as it happened in Burma. However, I could also see it developing a specialised sense - 'school where the teaching is in Mon', as opposed to a state school where the teaching is in Thai. So, what's the evidence that in Thailand ဘာ has meant 'school' in general, given that Halliday wrote that the word didn't mean 'school' in Thailand. --RichardW57 (talk) 22:59, 25 September 2023 (UTC)
- [84] [85] [86] [87] [88] Note: sqlite file = same data in Phuan's --Octahedron80 (talk) 07:17, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
- As I don't trust these links to remain long-term, these dictionary quotations are:
- [84] [85] [86] [87] [88] Note: sqlite file = same data in Phuan's --Octahedron80 (talk) 07:17, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
| Source | Mon | Thai-script transcription or transliteration | Wikified translation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Anusorn[3] | ဘာ | (เพีย) | วัด (wát, “temple”), โรงเรียน (roong-riian, “school”) |
| ဘာဗ္တောန်လိက် | (เพียเปียะโตนเลิ็ก) | โรงเรียน (roong-riian, “school”) | |
| Champi[4]? | ဘာဗတောန်သိက် | เภี่ยเปี้ยะตนเลิ่ด | โรงเรียน (roong-riian, “school”) |
| Champi[4]? | ဘာလကျာ် | เภี่ยเลี่ยะกยั๊จ | วัด (wát, “temple”) |
| ဘာကၟာ | เภี่ยกะมา | วัดวาอาราม (“temple”) | |
| Phuan[2] | ဘာ | [แพฺ-า] | วัด (wát, “temple”), โรงเรียน (roong-riian, “school”) |
| ဘာသာသနာ | [แพฺ-าซาซะนา] | วัดในพุทธศาสนา (“temple in Buddhism”) | |
| ဘာဗ္တောန်လိက် | [แพฺ-าแปฺ.โตนเลฺิจ] | โรงเรียน (roong-riian, “school”) |
--RichardW57 (talk) 09:29, 30 September 2023 (UTC)
- @Octahedron80: What reason do we have to believe that Anusorn is anything more than an imperfect copy of Halliday Issue 2? If there is no claim to be anything other than a translation of Halliday Issue 2, or strong evidence that it is more than a translation, then we cannot cite it in contradiction to Halliday Issue 2.
- Champi provides no evidence that the word in question means 'school'.
- That leaves Phuan, as represented in some database, who contradicts Halliday, who seems to have received his information from Haswell. I also worry that Phuan may have used Halliday's dictionary. A word that makes me suspicious is ဘာသာသနာ, which Halliday translates as 'mission school', i.e. a school run by missionaries. Have I translated the Thai translation of the meaning in Thailand correctly? The word as given for Thailand seems odd, as though Phuan saw it in a word list, felt he had to include it, and changed the meaning as though he didn't understand the English or thought it seemed odd. --RichardW57 (talk) 10:12, 30 September 2023 (UTC)
- Phuan was a local Mon person that did not contact to any farang. (He lived in 1889-1976.) The dictionary is made by a group of Thailandish Mon people which is based on Phuan's study. His memorial and how they did is also printed in the book. If I have time, I will take some pictures of those pages. --Octahedron80 (talk) 01:50, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
- I took the photos. Please look inside: [89] --Octahedron80 (talk) 13:19, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
References
[edit]- ↑ 1.0 1.1 R. Halliday (1922), A Mon-English Dictionary[1], Bangkok: Siam Society, page 348
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 2.2 พวน รามัญวงศ์ [Phuan Ramanyawong] (2005), พจนานุกรมมอญ-ไทย ฉบับมอญสยาม [Mon-Thai (Siamese) Dictionary], กรุงเทพฯ [Bangkok]: มติชน [Matichon], →ISBN
- ↑ 3.0 3.1 3.2 อนุสรณ์ สถานนท์, ร้อยตรี [Anusorn Sathanon, Sub-Lt.] (1984), พจนานุกรม มอญ-ไทย [Mon-Thai Dictionary]; Thai translation of Halliday, R. (1922), A Mon-English Dictionary, Bangkok: Siam Society (2nd ed.: Rangoon: Mon Cultural Section, Ministry of Union Culture, Govt. of the Union of Burma, 1955).
- ↑ 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.3 จำปี ซื่อสัตย์ [Champi Suesat] (2007[2008]), พจนานุกรมไทย-มอญ สำเนียงมอญลพบุรี [Thai-Mon (Lopburi Dialect) Dictionary] (in Thai), ปทุมธานี [Pathum Thani]: วัดจันทน์กะพ้อ [Chan Kapho Temple]
Mon. Rfv-sense: Obsolete form of စှ်.
The word စှ် means 10, as in the numbers '10' to '19'. From '20' up, including '83', the form is စှော်. --RichardW57 (talk) 07:52, 25 September 2023 (UTC)
- We also have more forms than those: [90] [91] [92] [93]. About စှ် and စှော်, I think they might be interchangeable, not strict to use only form per number. IMO, Old Mon စသ် turned into Modern Mon စဟ် at the beginning and then ဟ became subjoined by Burmese rule (?). In the other hand, စှော် happened because someone started adding explicit vowel to စှ်. Tall AA form also derived from the Burmese rule either.--Octahedron80 (talk) 07:38, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
- @Octahedron80: None of what you just quoted, so far as spellings go, contradict the observation that forms with /ɔ/ means '10' or '-teen', while forms with /o/ (Shorto is reported as having /u/) mean '-ty'. The only place that contradicts this is https://www.omniglot.com/language/numbers/mon.htm. Even dictionaries that lack an entry for စှော် etc. show the behaviour. I don't know how far back the distinction goes, though presumably not before Middle Mon. --RichardW57m (talk) 12:35, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
- Digression:
- Subscripting final consonants is or was pretty widespread; I don't think it's a particularity Burmese habit. It's even seen in Kharoshthi! Khmer used to do it, and an instance leaked into the Unicode standard. Lao did it with ຽ. Tai Tham still does it, even it is now less popular for /uːp/ and /up/, and some consonants get out of the way below by superscripting. I did wonder if the historical connection between Mon and Tai Tham was relevant. --RichardW57m (talk) 12:35, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
Old Coptic. Would like some source where it can be verified that this particular form of the word exists; the final vowel seems irregular with respect to the given Bohairic and Sahidic Coptic forms, and I can’t find mention of it on a quick search through the usual references. — Vorziblix (talk · contribs) 20:09, 29 September 2023 (UTC)
October 2023
[edit]อะปา added 30/9/23. ปาปา, ฟะ and ดาจ added 1/10/23. --RichardW57 (talk) 18:08, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
Mon. There is no evidence of the Thai script being used to write Mon, except as a transcription or transliteration system. Furthermore, no evidence of existence has been recorded for the words in these spellings. --RichardW57 (talk) 21:01, 30 September 2023 (UTC)
Mon.
อะคาน added 30/9/23. มฺอน and กะ added 1/10/23. --RichardW57 (talk) 17:42, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
These words are in the Thai script, but no evidence has been presented that the Thai script has been used for communicating in Mon. While a dictionary reference has been offered, these alleged words are almost certainly merely the pronunciation expressed in the Thai script. --RichardW57 (talk) 17:30, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
Mon. --RichardW57 (talk) 18:14, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
- Mon. There is no evidence of the Thai script being used to write Mon, except as a transcription or transliteration system. (Examples of usage as a transcription has been presented at ဘာ above.) --RichardW57 (talk) 18:25, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
Translingual. RFV of the gender / asexual sense. A very similar sense previously failed RFV, this one was (re)added without citations of actual use, and even its inclusion in the reference cited for it may be fictitious according to Wiktionary:Tea_room/2023/October#Some_gender/sexuality_symbols . (If at least three symbols — also the Eris one — have been added citing that book but appear to not be present in the book, perhaps we also need to examine other entries which claim to be sourced to that book...?) - -sche (discuss) 13:51, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
Sanskrit. Rfv-sense: Does this term really have no sense relating to the root 'yoke'? Can we verify with the oldest texts (viz. the Rig Veda)? ᛙᛆᚱᛐᛁᚿᛌᛆᛌ ᛭ Proto-Norsing ᛭ Ask me anything 14:56, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
- योगस् (yogas) is not old. It's not in EWAia.[1] It seems to me to have arisen in alternation[2] with योग (yoga), which in late Vedic could mean "concentration, contemplation" (that is, "yoking the mind" I guess). —Caoimhin ceallach (talk) 16:19, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
- Can you add this information to the entry? ᛙᛆᚱᛐᛁᚿᛌᛆᛌ ᛭ Proto-Norsing ᛭ Ask me anything 16:38, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
- If it exists. I'm not convinced the entry can pass verification. NWS has it with an asterisk,[3] meaning the word was only found in glossaries. —Caoimhin ceallach (talk) 23:32, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
- Can you add this information to the entry? ᛙᛆᚱᛐᛁᚿᛌᛆᛌ ᛭ Proto-Norsing ᛭ Ask me anything 16:38, 17 October 2023 (UTC)
References
[edit]- ^ Mayrhofer, Manfred (1996), “YOJ”, in Etymologisches Wörterbuch des Altindoarischen [Etymological Dictionary of Old Indo-Aryan][2] (in German), volume 2, Heidelberg: Carl Winter Universitätsverlag, page 417
- ^ The template Template:R:sa:Wackernagel does not use the parameter(s):
vol=3
Please see Module:checkparams for help with this warning.Wackernagel, Jakob (1896-1964), Altindische Grammatik [Grammar of Ancient Indian] (Indogermanische Bibliothek. 2. Reihe: Wörterbücher) (in German), Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, page 286: “§149b)β)” - ^ Otto Böhtlingk; Richard Schmidt (1879-1928), “योगस्”, in Walter Slaje, Jürgen Hanneder, Paul Molitor, Jörg Ritter, editors, Nachtragswörterbuch des Sanskrit [Dictionary of Sanskrit with supplements] (in German), Halle-Wittenberg: Martin-Luther-Universität, published 2016
Added by @Chariotrider555. कालमैत्री (talk) 08:05, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
- कुड़ुमचोदी, in R.S. McGregor's The Oxford Hindi-English Dictionary (1993), published by Oxford University Press, [94]
- kuṛum-ćodī, in John T. Platt's A Dictionary of Urdu, Classical Hindi, and English (1884), published by W. H. Allen & Co., [95]
- کڙمچودي / kuṛum-chodī, in John Shakespear's A Dictionary, Hindustani and English (1834), third edition, published by J. L. Cox & Son, [96]
- Chariotrider555 (talk) 16:47, 22 October 2023 (UTC);
- Good कालमैत्री (talk) 16:59, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Chariotrider555 It still looks a very obscure term, have you ever heard this word? कालमैत्री (talk) 02:47, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
- User:कालमैत्री, It's a dialectal vulgar tadbhava term. It is not likely be a word in common (definitely not cultivated) usage, especially outside of Haryana-Punjab (don't know if McGregor is enough to classify it as purely Bangru/Haryanvi however). It's well attested in linguistic literature, as early as 1790. Chariotrider555 (talk) 03:33, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Chariotrider555 It is likely obsolete now, as one knows a particular variety of haryanvi i never heard this word. कालमैत्री (talk) 04:12, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
- User:कालमैत्री, It's a dialectal vulgar tadbhava term. It is not likely be a word in common (definitely not cultivated) usage, especially outside of Haryana-Punjab (don't know if McGregor is enough to classify it as purely Bangru/Haryanvi however). It's well attested in linguistic literature, as early as 1790. Chariotrider555 (talk) 03:33, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
Old Hindi, also urdu. Sense as genital. कालमैत्री (talk) 16:53, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
- عورت / ʻaurat , " (orig.) The private part or parts (so called because it is abominable to uncover or expose them)" in John T. Platt's A Dictionary of Urdu, Classical Hindi, and English (1884), published by W. H. Allen & Co., [97]
- عورت / aurat, "1. The pudenda of man or woman, that which is concealed through modesty." in John Shakespear's A Dictionary, Hindustani and English (1834), third edition, published by J. L. Cox & Son, [98]
- عورت / ‘au'rat, "nordity parts of body that should go covered" in Bashsir Ahmad Qureshi's Kitabistan's 20th century standard dictionary (1971), published by Kitabistan Publishing [99]
- Chariotrider555 (talk) 03:48, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Chariotrider555 That doesn't verify. Platts mentions it originally( in Persian?) meant private parts. But do we have any citations etc. to verify this sense to been in use, especially in urdu. This 1827 grammar also only mentions its use as woman कालमैत्री (talk) 04:26, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
- What is nordity? Is the use of that word any indication that this dictionary might not be the highest quality, or is it a rare, specialized word that we just don't list? Thanks, —Soap— 08:07, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
- is it possible that it's a scan error for nudity? —Soap— 08:23, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, scanno for nudity is very likely; it looks like that link isn't great at reproducing punctuation either. The whole definition says "woman female wife nakedness; nordity parts of body that should go covered", which I interpret as "woman, female, wife; nakedness, nudity; parts of body that should go covered". And honestly, that's probably the most misogynistic semantic shift I've ever heard of. It's as if some future stage of English would have cunt as its unmarked, everyday word for "woman". —Mahāgaja · talk 08:34, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks. And yes, that's what brought my attention to this RFV. I've heard that some feminists want to replace this word with the Persian زن (zan) or a similar word; see this page or a search for phrases like "don't say aurat" for newer articles, such as this one which applies to Hindi. I dont know how common this sentiment is, or whether it's worth mentioning with a label or with a usage note that some people find the term offensive. The impression I get from the linked article above is that there is no easy replacement for it, and the impression I get from the Google search is that the etymology is not widely known. (Also, for what it's worth, it's plausible that English wife is cognate to a Tocharian word for genitals, though we can't reconstruct the meaning of the original PIE from just two cognates, if they even are related.) —Soap— 09:01, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Soap This offensive feeling is very uncommon, only in some feminists and as for Hindi fringe groups who dislike Persian loanwords. Normal people just use it. Word0151 (talk) 10:08, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
- The Wikipedia articles Intimate parts in Islam and Aurat (word) paint a more nuanced picture. See also the senses given at Arabic عورة (ʕawra). --Lambiam 16:27, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Mahagaja: – FWIW, I don't think it literally meant 'genitals', or like the word 'cunt'. I would tag it with a religious sense. UDB has defined at as جسم کے وہ اعضا جن کے دیکھنے دکھانے سے شرم آئے ( مرد کا ناف سے ٹخنے تک اور عورت کا تمام جسم باستثنائے چہرہ ) ۔ (jism ke vo a'zā jin ke dekhne dikhāne se śarm āe (mard kā nāf se ṭuxne tak aur 'aurt kā tamām jism bā satisnāe cahra).), ie. The parts of the body which are embarrassing to be shown (from the centre/stomach/belly button till the ankles for men and the entire body except the face for the women). They've given two quotes for this, one dated 1744, and the other 1867. نعم البدل (talk) 16:34, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks. And yes, that's what brought my attention to this RFV. I've heard that some feminists want to replace this word with the Persian زن (zan) or a similar word; see this page or a search for phrases like "don't say aurat" for newer articles, such as this one which applies to Hindi. I dont know how common this sentiment is, or whether it's worth mentioning with a label or with a usage note that some people find the term offensive. The impression I get from the linked article above is that there is no easy replacement for it, and the impression I get from the Google search is that the etymology is not widely known. (Also, for what it's worth, it's plausible that English wife is cognate to a Tocharian word for genitals, though we can't reconstruct the meaning of the original PIE from just two cognates, if they even are related.) —Soap— 09:01, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, scanno for nudity is very likely; it looks like that link isn't great at reproducing punctuation either. The whole definition says "woman female wife nakedness; nordity parts of body that should go covered", which I interpret as "woman, female, wife; nakedness, nudity; parts of body that should go covered". And honestly, that's probably the most misogynistic semantic shift I've ever heard of. It's as if some future stage of English would have cunt as its unmarked, everyday word for "woman". —Mahāgaja · talk 08:34, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
- Well the discussion was not for its history/etymology(LOL). But verifying its use as genitals, which can't be as i see?कालमैत्री (talk) 16:45, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Chariotrider555 That doesn't verify. Platts mentions it originally( in Persian?) meant private parts. But do we have any citations etc. to verify this sense to been in use, especially in urdu. This 1827 grammar also only mentions its use as woman कालमैत्री (talk) 04:26, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
- Old Hindi is not a well-documented language, so dictionary entries may suffice for inclusion. This does not hold for Urdu. If the sense existed in Old Hindi, it is plausible the sense existed in "old" Urdu (basically the same language as Old Hindi), but did not make it to present-day Urdu. --Lambiam 16:51, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Lambiam Does the word exist in old Hindi?. The dictionaries (of 19th century hindi which is not old-hindi) tells of it meaning originally(Persian?) and then writes what it means in Urdu/Hindi as in [100]. And its more of a why/context the new dictionaries give when they write this and not from the view of Old-Hindi. We are only able to verify it only meant as woman. कालमैत्री (talk) 17:01, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
- Since the word exists both in Hindi (as औरत (aurat)) and in Urdu (as عورت), it is reasonable to believe it had an ancestor in Old Hindi. Actually, the etymology section at Hindi औरत states that that ancestor is Old Hindi औरत (aurata), spelled the same but with a slightly different Romanization. Morphology and Syntax of Old Hindī, to which this is sourced, only give the sense “woman” (for the stem aurat-).[101] But this is not a dictionary. I do not know if there are any Old Hindi dictionaries. --Lambiam 18:10, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Lambiam Does the word exist in old Hindi?. The dictionaries (of 19th century hindi which is not old-hindi) tells of it meaning originally(Persian?) and then writes what it means in Urdu/Hindi as in [100]. And its more of a why/context the new dictionaries give when they write this and not from the view of Old-Hindi. We are only able to verify it only meant as woman. कालमैत्री (talk) 17:01, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
Urdu. Many hits, should be enough; don't know about books though. कालमैत्री (talk) 02:44, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
A cursory search seems to show that this is a proposed "official" term which does not receive much usage. I've found it in a dictionary from the 1960s, but not in "running text". Hebrew is a WDL so we'll need more than dictionary entries. Корсикэн-Уара (юзэр толк) 21:44, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
- הירקון: הנהר וגלילותיו - שמואל אביצור, Shmuel Avitsur - Google Books
- השדה: חוברות שמושיות למשק החקלאי המערב - Google Books
- Ṭevaʻ ṿa-arets: yarḥon le-ḥaḳlaʾut, le-ṭevaʻ ṿeli-yediʻat ha-arets - Google Books
- Molad: yarḥon medini ṿe-sifruti - Google Books
- מחזור הצומח והחי בישראל - Eliezer Smoly, אליעזר שמאלי - Google Books
- הלוטרה כלב הנהר - רשות הטבע והגנים
- מכון גנזים : כלב הנהר (לוטרה)
- לא לוטרה - כללי
- The name appeared in officialese Hebrew publications from the 1950s, and today mostly in crossword puzzles. Danny lost (talk) 03:24, 25 July 2025 (UTC)
November 2023
[edit]Old Czech. Tagged but not listed. @Dárawine as the creator and @Zhnka as the tagger.
I'm a bit confused, because I do see an instance of the term here, but I'm not 100% sure what it means. Vininn126 (talk) 14:35, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- "stsl. kamy a kamenь" means "Old Church Slavonic kamy and kamenь". I haven't found any attestation of kámy and it would be a great surprise for me if there were any. The consonant patterns of the feminine and neuter gender have kept their nominative (r-stem – máti; n-stem – břiemě, t-stem – kuřě) distinct from other cases (mateře, břěmene, kuřěte). I think the reason for the disappearance of the masculine nominative was the Proto-Slavic contrast between nominative and accusative (*kàmy ~ *kàmenь), which isn't seen in any other masculine patterns and was impossible to retain. I haven't seen an example of masculine n-stem which would've kept the original nominative. If there is no attestation of kámy, the page should be deleted. Zhnka (talk) 15:46, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
Taos. A place name "Stone Fence". Have no idea what or where (if anywhere) this refers to. Created in 2008 by User:Ish ishwar, who is almost completely inactive. User:-sche, any ideas? Benwing2 (talk) 00:19, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
- it's a placename in the Taos language. The English name is just a literal translation of the Taos. Nothing more, nothing less. There's no more information on it as I remember it. It's very possible that there will be no real English name for the place since Taos people have traditionally been secretive about their culture from outsiders. Furthermore, the placename is from a book of traditional folktales, origin origins, religious myths, etc. It also possible that living Taos people don't know what the name refers like the way Western folks don't know where the garden of Eden is. Ish ishwar (talk) 05:37, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
- @Ish ishwar We need a least one citation, since Taos is a low-resource language. We can't just take it on faith from you. Benwing2 (talk) 05:44, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
- It has one. It's from Parson's book Taos tales. All other Taos lexical entries that do not contain the mention of Parsons are from Trager's body of work on Taos, which include a grammatical sketch and few articles on mostly phonology, morphophonology, and prosody. I included some info from Parsons because she gave her text to Trager who checked some of her transcriptions with speakers. (Trager was a famous structural linguist who has good ears while Parsons was an anthropologist who apparently couldn't hear the difference between ejective and non-ejective consonants.) However, I will say that I hardly added anything from Parsons – just the first several pages. There are probably many words that could be added that may not be in Trager's publications. Somebody has to go through it. Ish ishwar (talk) 05:56, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
- @Ish ishwar We need a least one citation, since Taos is a low-resource language. We can't just take it on faith from you. Benwing2 (talk) 05:44, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
- Trager & Parsons sources: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taos_language#Bibliography
- Regarding your desire for subset categorizations of placenames, you are simply not going to get the detail that you want for a language like this. Now, since the story that contains this word contains what we might consider magic, you might could guess that this placename is mythical placename. However, that would be pure speculation on our part. The only way to get your information would to travel to Taos and convince some native speaker to answer your questions. That might be hard to do given the traditional secretiveness of the culture to outsiders. (For example, if you look at Parsons's papers housed at the American Philosophical Society, most of her Taos notebooks are restricted access presumably at the request of the Taos government.) It's better to just call it a placename and leave it that. Ish ishwar (talk) 06:18, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
- @Ish ishwar You need to add a citation from the book you quoted from that illustrates the term, otherwise the term is liable to be deleted. I also think if we can't even determine whether it's a real or fictional placename, it shouldn't be included, but I am not an expert on WT:CFI; others will have to chime in. Benwing2 (talk) 06:31, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
- Regarding your desire for subset categorizations of placenames, you are simply not going to get the detail that you want for a language like this. Now, since the story that contains this word contains what we might consider magic, you might could guess that this placename is mythical placename. However, that would be pure speculation on our part. The only way to get your information would to travel to Taos and convince some native speaker to answer your questions. That might be hard to do given the traditional secretiveness of the culture to outsiders. (For example, if you look at Parsons's papers housed at the American Philosophical Society, most of her Taos notebooks are restricted access presumably at the request of the Taos government.) It's better to just call it a placename and leave it that. Ish ishwar (talk) 06:18, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
- I don't think you understand the degree of documentation of Taos. Parsons's book is a book of traditional Taos stories written in English that includes the occasional word from the Taos language. Almost all Taos words from that book do not occur in the context of Taos sentences, the words sometimes occur in the context of English sentences and most often in footnotes as a Taos single word with morphemic glosses provided by Trager. What you want doesn't exist. Her book appears to finally have been scanned, take a look at the page: https://quod.lib.umich.edu/g/genpub/agy7796.0001.001/30
- I would guess that there are no published texts in the Taos language – exception being that maybe some hardcore US Christians (like the Wycliffe Bible translators) have attempted a translation of the Christian bible. The Taos community probably has materials that are private. There are probably unpublished texts from linguists' fieldnotes.
- If you include the word Eden here, then you should include hìwkwíalto because they likely have the same degree of determination of whether it's meets your 'real' definition. (It might be insulting to call it 'fictional.' I think Christians usually elevate their religious texts to be outside of fiction.) Ish ishwar (talk) 08:48, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
- @Ish ishwar You need to read WT:CFI. We are quite liberal about allowing attestation of limited-resource languages, but there is a limit. Eden is nothing like hìwkwíalto because there are a zillion attestations of the former. If the words are included only in footnotes and mentions, then you need to quote those footnotes and mentions. If the meaning is uncertain, as it sounds like hìwkwíalto substantially is, use
{{def-uncertain}}with best-guess meanings following; but in this case it should not be categorized as a placename. We can't just ignore the rules because work is required to follow them. Benwing2 (talk) 09:26, 6 November 2023 (UTC)- Looking at the scan of the source, I don't think it even is a place name. I think it's just a common noun that means literally 'stone fence' and might idiomatically mean 'shrine'. —Mahāgaja · talk 10:40, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
- If you need a zillion attestations, then you will have to delete all Taos entries. Most are listed only a single time in every source. All words in Parsons are included in the main text of each story in Parsons's inaccurate phonetic transcription, the footnotes contain Trager's rechecking and phonemicization+morpheme identification of Parsons's phonetics. The meaning seems to be certain – I don't know where your uncertainty is coming from.
- The 'Shrine ?' note that follows the morphemic gloss is presumably Parsons's. It's not clear what means. My interpretation was that she meant that this may be a shrine location. The following note to look at page 99 shows that another character also lives at the same place. If Trager has an uncertainty, then there will be a question before the '(T').' which you can see on some footnotes.
- If you read the preface to this book, you'll see that Parsons says that usually Taos language stories start by mentioning the characters and the places that they live. She explicitly uses the term place name. Additionally, in her English translation, she uses the locative noun without a definite article which is typical of how English placenames are treated grammatically. Thus, I conclude that these nouns are placenames. I use the term placename in a semantic sense because placename nouns and non-placename nouns are identical except for the addition of a locative suffix/postclitic -to. I don't think you should second guess the authors – just report what the sources say. Ish ishwar (talk) 06:34, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
- @Ish ishwar Please read WT:CFI. You do not need a zillion citations for low-resource languages like Taos, only one. I agree with reporting what the sources say, but as you mention, the sources don't say it's a place name, it's just some assumptions you're making. I think it's important that all assumptions like this are noted and that citations are given appropriately, like I said before. I agree with User:Mahagaja that this is more likely to be a generic "stone fence"; presumably the author would have capitalized Stone Fence or otherwise made clear it was intended as a specific place name (and would presumably have given some indication of where the place name is). Also you have consistently adopted a somewhat hostile attitude towards me from the beginning; I'd ask you to tone it down and assume good faith on my part. I am trying to improve the quality of these entries, which are old and in need of cleanup, by giving you some ideas as to how to clean up the entries. Benwing2 (talk) 07:07, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
- @Ish ishwar You need to read WT:CFI. We are quite liberal about allowing attestation of limited-resource languages, but there is a limit. Eden is nothing like hìwkwíalto because there are a zillion attestations of the former. If the words are included only in footnotes and mentions, then you need to quote those footnotes and mentions. If the meaning is uncertain, as it sounds like hìwkwíalto substantially is, use
- If you include the word Eden here, then you should include hìwkwíalto because they likely have the same degree of determination of whether it's meets your 'real' definition. (It might be insulting to call it 'fictional.' I think Christians usually elevate their religious texts to be outside of fiction.) Ish ishwar (talk) 08:48, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
- The source does say that stories start with character names and a placename. This noun + postposition does occur at the start of a story. Therefore, according to the source, it is placename. It's not an assumption since the source explicitly says so. I'm fine with putting your doubts in the entry, but it should be clear that the doubt is a supposition.
- Your assumption that some indication of where the placename is should be given seems unreasonable. I would find it likely that Parsons doesn't know where numerous places were in the Taos territory. Although it's a different language & culture (but in the same Southwest region), Keith Basso wrote a book about placenames in the Western Apache language in which you can see that there are hundreds of specific geological formations/areas have that names with no corresponding name for the place in English (e.g. Goshtł'ish Tú Bił Siką́né 'Water Lies With Mud In An Open Container,' Gad O'ááhá 'Juniper Tree Stands Alone,' Tséé Dotł'izh Tę́naahijaahá 'Green Rocks Side By Side Jut Down Into Water,' etc.) Nobody not from Western Apache culture knows where these are since it's all private knowledge. (Basso notes in the book that Western Apache folks didn't want the locations of the names published.) I don't find it improbable that this is similar for hundreds of languages.
- I don't see how I've been hostile or how any of what I wrote can be interpreted that way. I haven't agreed with you and still don't agree with you, and I'm just trying to explain why. It's good to improve entries. I just don't think the information should include surmises. Ish ishwar (talk) 23:50, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
Hindi.
Urdu. @نعم البدل — Fenakhay (حيطي · مساهماتي) 13:47, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
- @Fenakhay: I'll be astonished if it can get past WT:ATTEST. نعم البدل (talk) 01:07, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
According to ஃஸ் and [102] Tamil sequence "ஃக்" is transliterated "kh". According to ஃக் and Module:ta-translit/testcases it should be "ḥk". According to w:ISO_15919 it should be "ḵk". What is the proper transliteration? Olaf (talk) 02:46, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
- There is no particular one standard to deem the pronunciation of this letter, it's not used very commonly among Tamil speakers, you will find it's usage as (kh) mostly only in Tamil Islamic texts and in Muslim names. For a common Tamilian with no linguistic expertise, it's just (ḥk). And that goes for almost all the Tamil letters, most of them have a different sound based on where they occur in the word. For example, க is pronounced as /k/ in the beginning of the word, but it becomes /g/ when it comes in the middle of a word, but retains its /k/ sound if a consonant(no schwa) precedes it. But if you generally look into the standards, ISO only considers the sound it makes in the beginning of the word as standard. I'd suggest you go with the ISO standard. Godwithus (talk) 04:16, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Polish. Rfv-sense:
- night of the long knives (purge in which opponents of a regime or political party are killed or removed)
Not implausible, but in Polish I've only seen it referring to the Nazi purge, or comparing events to it (nonetheless referencing the purge of 1934). Example of the latter (emphasis mine):
- Szkoda, że biskup Życiński nie wspomniał o odwołaniu Lecha Kaczyńskiego zorganizowanym niczym noc długich noży z natychmiastowym pozbyciem się jego najbliższych współpracowników i odwetem na mianowanych przez niego ludziach.Hythonia (talk) 14:54, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
- Example of this metaphorical meaning: https://www.google.pl/books/edition/P%C3%B3%C5%82mistrz/utuoEAAAQBAJ?hl=pl&gbpv=1&dq=%22noc+d%C5%82ugich+no%C5%BCy%22+-niemcy&pg=PT94&printsec=frontcover Olaf (talk) 20:55, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Do people actually use these or the expected terms Fionnlainn, Fionnlainneach, Fionnlainnis? Caoimhin ceallach (talk) 23:17, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
- I don't know, but "Suòmaidh" gets 53,000 hits in a Google search and there's a Scots Gaelic Wikipedia article with that title [103]. --Hekaheka (talk) 07:02, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
- Stòrlann Nàiseanta na Gàidhlig, the official organization that produces Gaelic-language educational materials in Scotland, has a spreadsheet located here (if you don't want to download an XLS file/aren't using a device that has an Excel or OpenOffice equivalent, the relevant sheet is copied on this blog post) that lists geographic names of countries in Scottish Gaelic. Finland is provided as both Suòmaidh and Fionnlainn, and my understanding is that Suòmaidh is the preferred name, deriving from the Finnish endonym Suomi. Fionnlainn, meanwhile, is a direct loan-word from Modern English, and at least in educational settings, those are often shunned whenever there is a historical alternative. (In fact, Am Faclair Beag does not list Fionlainn at all. Suòmaidh is the only provided translation for "Finland" in that dictionary.) As to whether either term is more often used in casual conversation by native speakers, I cannot say -- searching BBC Alba pulls up no Gaelic results for any derivative of Suomi, and only one hit for Fionnlainn. Qwertygiy (talk) 00:19, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
Persian. Rfv-sense: "Gatha". Seems like an interpolation from Middle Persian.--Saranamd (talk) 14:01, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
- (Translated) form Dehkhoda: [104]
- "The oldest and most sacred part of the Avesta, as mentioned in its place, is the Gathas... The Gathas (Gatha) have become (Gas) in the Pahlavi language, and its plural (Gasan) and its relative (Gasanik) have been mentioned in a descriptive manner. Each of the Gathas poems is also called (Gas). This same word has become (Gah) in the Persian language after Islam because most of the Sins in the Pahlavi language have been changed to "Ha" in Persian, and Gas is also like this."
- Also used here [105]
- Light hearted sam (talk) 12:21, 17 April 2025 (UTC)
Malay. I've never heard this word before. As far as I know, "teh" is the Malay word for tea, and that's the word I've used and heard whenever I've needed to speak Malay. The dog2 (talk) 06:50, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
- I'm a native speaker and you're right, it is "teh"! I've never heard of "ca" before and it's not even listed in the Kamus Dewan, however I saw the word "cha" in Classical Malay dictionary dating back to 1701 and if we were to follow the modern standard spelling, it would be spelled "ca". If the entry doesn't fit the WT:CFI, it should be deleted :o Sponge2490 (talk) 00:05, 16 June 2025 (UTC)
- I think the entry should be moved to cha. Alfarizi M (talk) 05:50, 16 June 2025 (UTC)
Polish. KamilekLebioda (talk) 19:43, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
- I've heard it only as "do usranej śmierci" but if you google it it shows some results for do usranego końca. Tashi (talk) 22:35, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
December 2023
[edit]Albanian. A capitalised diacriticless version of evǵít, the obsolete Meyer orthography for evgjit, found as a mention in English-language context. Catonif (talk) 17:19, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
Pali.
See discussion at Wiktionary:Beer_parlour/2023/December#Zero width joiners in Sinhala script?. Unless the spelling with visible hal karima can be verified (only one durable source needs to be quoted), this page should be deleted. --RichardW57m (talk) 16:40, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
Pali.
See discussion at Wiktionary:Beer_parlour/2023/December#Zero width joiners in Sinhala script?. Unless the spelling with visible hal karima can be verified (only one durable source needs to be quoted), these three pages should moved to the correct spelling, which has touching letters instead. For each page, the correct spelling is shown under the 'alternative forms' heading. If a redirect is left after the move, it should be deleted. --RichardW57m (talk) 17:29, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
All three pages were created by Apisite, who trusted an unchecked Latin to non-Latin conversion. In general that should not be trusted - Module:pi-Latn-translit/testcases currently shows 11 failures. --RichardW57m (talk) 17:29, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
Translingual: "Used as a symbol to signifying support or solidarity for Palestinian nationalism". — SURJECTION / T / C / L / 13:39, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
- Dozens of usage when searched in Twitter or Facebook or even Instagram. Svenurban (talk) 02:26, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
Sanskrit. Rfv-sense: (or rather, form)
Reportedly, the feminine of धीर (dhīra, “firm”) is only धीरा (dhīrā), and not धीरी (dhīrī), whereas धीर (dhīra, “wise”) has both forms as the feminine.[1]
- NSW has धीरी f (dhīrī) for the sense “intelligent”.[2] But I can't find an example in online corpora. —Caoimhin ceallach (talk) 19:36, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
References
[edit]- ^ Monier Williams (1899), “धीर”, in A Sanskrit–English Dictionary, […], new edition, Oxford: At the Clarendon Press, →OCLC, page 517.
- ^ Otto Böhtlingk; Richard Schmidt (1879-1928), “धीर”, in Walter Slaje, Jürgen Hanneder, Paul Molitor, Jörg Ritter, editors, Nachtragswörterbuch des Sanskrit [Dictionary of Sanskrit with supplements] (in German), Halle-Wittenberg: Martin-Luther-Universität, published 2016
January 2024
[edit]Pali.
Formally registered here, but I had overlooked its being recorded in both the PTS Pali dictionary and in Childers. I therefore say, Keep, and think I could find an occurrence in the Milinda-Panha if I made the effort. That may be the oldest occurrence in Pali. Occurrences in the commentaries, reported by the PTS dictionary, may be harder to track down to printed materials. --RichardW57 (talk) 00:14, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
Old High German. Not on any of the OHG noun entries and although I'm not very familiar with OHG sound changes I can find no justification for a change from -a- to -u-. Could be from *-uz but the entry specifically states that the suffix applies to a-stems. -saph 🍏 15:41, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
Ancient Greek. Strongly doubt this dual is attested. @Vergencescattered Did you see this one somewhere in a text? — Mnemosientje (t · c) 08:38, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
Same as the above. — Mnemosientje (t · c) 08:38, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
Similar case. — Mnemosientje (t · c) 08:42, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
- Do we have a policy (or policy-adjacent recommendation) on the attestation of nonlemma forms? Certainly for Latin, we have tons of bot-created nonlemma forms that may or may not be actually attested. For Ancient Greek, I feel like creating entries for such purely theoretical forms is a waste of time, and I wish editors interested in Ancient Greek would spend their Wiktionary time differently, but once the entries have been created, I'm not sure we should spend time deleting them either. —Mahāgaja · talk 13:12, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
- I don't know of an overall policy, but in the case of Latin, I think it is generally agreed not to list certain forms, e.g. the locative, unless they are either attested or part of a word category that is known to productively use this form (e.g. city names). This is because we know the use of the locative in Latin was restricted and not fully productive for all nouns. I don't know what Mnemosientje's point is, nor am I familiar with how ancient Greek used the dual, but if it was a barely or questionably productive category, I could see how a policy of only listing it if attested might make sense. On the other hand, the posts on this web page state "the dual is always optional [...] On the other hand, it isn't terribly rare, archaic, or limited to specific referents or registers" and "In Homer, the dual seems to be freely used whenever two items are mentioned", which suggests that whether or not a word's dual form is attested might be more a matter of chance than a linguistically significant distinction from words with attested dual forms.--Urszag (talk) 14:00, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Urszag: If I remember correctly, the use of the dual in Ancient Greek (as in many IE languages such as OE) died out over time: Homer may have used it regularly, but later authors didn't. To know whether a dual form is likely to be attested, you would need to know date and dialect (and possibly whether the writer was trying to come across as archaic). That would make use of the dual as anachronistic for some verbs as "emaileth". Chuck Entz (talk) 15:38, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
- My understanding is that our handling of Latin forms an exception in this respect, and even there non-lemma forms have in the past often enough been challenged successfully in RFV; the convention there appears to be an optimistic "assume attestation, but delete if challenged and so shown to be unattested", whereas for other dead languages the treatment is generally pessimistic ("don't assume attestation, only create an entry when certain of a form's existence"). Certainly for the Germanic languages, the convention has as long as I can remember specifically been to avoid creating entries for unattested inflected forms, even when they might be somewhat predictable.
- I am not sure it is codified somewhere, but subjecting non-lemma forms to the attestation criterium by default makes sense to me. Not subjecting them to this criterium could arguably be done on the basis of the predictability of morphology: if one form is attested and the forms are readily deduced (i.e. a lemma entry can be created that belongs to a clear inflectional category), why not create all the non-lemma entries for the inflected forms either regardless of attestation? This however also leads to questions of determining on a per-case basis whether a form is "predictable enough" to be included anyway, which seems undesirable to me. I much prefer having our attestation requirement be universal. — Mnemosientje (t · c) 17:28, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
- What tools are there to look for a specific word form in Latin/Greek? Similar to Grassman's dictionary, which lists all attested forms from the Rigveda. I know Thesaurus Linguae Latinae, but it's not exactly user friendly. —Caoimhin ceallach (talk) 13:56, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
- I don't know of an overall policy, but in the case of Latin, I think it is generally agreed not to list certain forms, e.g. the locative, unless they are either attested or part of a word category that is known to productively use this form (e.g. city names). This is because we know the use of the locative in Latin was restricted and not fully productive for all nouns. I don't know what Mnemosientje's point is, nor am I familiar with how ancient Greek used the dual, but if it was a barely or questionably productive category, I could see how a policy of only listing it if attested might make sense. On the other hand, the posts on this web page state "the dual is always optional [...] On the other hand, it isn't terribly rare, archaic, or limited to specific referents or registers" and "In Homer, the dual seems to be freely used whenever two items are mentioned", which suggests that whether or not a word's dual form is attested might be more a matter of chance than a linguistically significant distinction from words with attested dual forms.--Urszag (talk) 14:00, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
- We know the dual forms of λόγoς which this is a compound of, so I see no reason I couldn't create these forms. I'll also add that if those forms shouldn't be created, they shouldn't be autogenerated by the template and redlinked in the first place. Vergencescattered (talk) 18:32, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
February 2024
[edit]Translingual. Rfv-sense: A symbol used for online identification of the Azov Brigade of Ukraine, often to signal support for it.
This is a character from the Yi syllabary, but there does seem to be a little bit of use online. Not much, though, and the results are pretty much all in Ukrainian, so I don't think the translingual header is justified. Theknightwho (talk) 14:14, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
- I can find it a lot in a search of my few dozens political/teenage ukronazi channels on Telegram, often in names so you already know allegiance. On the other hand remember that you can find it (stylized this way) on shirts (domestically produced in the circle of ꑭ), hardly so entered in Unicode but I suspect reinforced from it?
- So with the names of channels only examples I analyze: Anglophone channel: “ ꑭ Oppressed Lifters” https://t.me/OppressedLifters Ukrainophone: https://t.me/sooproon Супрунята ꑭ Iдея Nауки ⚛️✡️Супрунята ꑭ Iдея Nауки ⚛️✡️ – Where apparently ꑭ is basically a shorthand for українська, the other symbols meaning that he is also a Jew or Philosemite and interested in science. Though on the other hand it occurs right after “Ukrainian” in the English channel name of an Ukrainian-language channel “ukrain1an ꑭ news” https://t.me/ukrain1an_news. Surely however in “𝙄𝙣𝙨𝙤𝙢𝙣𝙞𝙖 ꑭ 𝙉𝙎𝘽𝙈” https://t.me/InsomniaNSBM or “ꑭ ᴠᴀʟʜöʟʟ ✙” https://t.me/vallholl it means the channel is of Ukrainian origin and alledged with the said troops; in the former you cannot even claim a language since it is basically only dumping music. There is at least a point to make about why this symbolic is so frequent.
- Odd you say “online” in spite of the same situation on Twitter, and DDG finds Telegram channels too. Fay Freak (talk) 14:45, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
Russian. Rfv-sense: (fiction, usually capitalised) Chaos, demonic entities, their monsters, and armies from the Warhammer franchises by Games Workshop
If it’s anything like English Chaos (sense 3) then this might be able to pass WT:FICTION, as I’ve definitely heard the English equivalent used outside of direct reference to the franchise. I don’t know if this has the same purchase, though, and it should probably be moved to Хаос (Xaos) if it does pass. @Fay Freak - I feel like you might know? Theknightwho (talk) 17:04, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- RFV-failed. —Granger (talk · contribs) 20:29, 22 September 2025 (UTC)
Dacian.
"A kind of fruit, the small plantain."
This is one of many Dacian entries added 18 years ago by the same editor, none of which have any information as to source. I decided to start with this one because it contains a glaring error that shows complete ignorance of the subject matter. There are two main definitions for plantain: a small edible weed in the genus Plantago which is native to Europe where the Dacians once lived, and a kind of banana- which definitely isn't. The mention of fruit says to me that this person saw the word in some discussion of Indo-European languages and made an entry out of it without checking anything.
A recent discussion at Wiktionary:Beer parlour/2024/February#κινούβοιλα (Dacian) led some to question whether a single mention of a Dacian word in Greek script in an Ancient Greek herbal was worthy of an entry. This is far worse: no indication where it came from, what the language of the text it occurred in was, and no guarantee that this is even an accurate representation of the original. I'm sure there's an Ancient Greek or Latin herbal somewhere that this came from, but without knowing the original script and the method of transliteration if this isn't the original script, it's impossible to know what the "x" represents, for instance. The likelihood that this came from some third-hand discussion about Dacian rather than the original source adds another layer of uncertainty. Chuck Entz (talk) 06:14, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
- Pseudo-Apuleius maybe? "HERBA PLANTAGO ... Nomina herbae. A Graecis dicitur arnoglossa, alii arnion, alii probation, alii cinoglossa, alii eptapleuron, Galli tarbidolotius, Spahi tetharica, Siculi polineuron, <alii> tirsion, profetae ura egneumonos, Aegyptii asaer, alii thetarion, Daci sipoax, Itali plantago lata, Romani plantago maior, alii septeneruia." ([106])
- It's like: "It is called arnoglossa by the Greeks". But arnoglossa isn't proper Greek. In Greek it would be something like (*?)ἀρνόγλωσσα (arnóglōssa) (script and spiritus, accent). Also it could be a Latin mistake for ἀρνόγλωσσον (arnóglōsson) (2nd decl. neuter ending -on/ον instead of 1st decl. ending -a/α). In other cases there could also be a Latin ending instead of the original one, as in "Galii pinpedonum" while WP gives the ending as -on. Thus with Pseudo-Apuleius as only source it would be Gaulish *pinpedonon.
- Google Books gives text previews with "sipoax and sipotax help to restore the Dacian form *siptoáx: it is a derivative from *sipta < IE *septm 'seven' plus the suffix -āk(o)s" and "Dacian: *septm > Dacian *sipta and -a:k(o)s > *siptoax > sipotax and sipoax (Pseudoapuleius)". So it would be Dacian *siptoax/*siptoáx. --11:19, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
All contributions by User:Wonnral
[edit]I've just had the pleasure of removing an Eastern Pwo term spelled ka, allegedly representing a term pronounced /kʰaduʔ/, meaning "airplane", derived from a Proto-Karen term with the same meaning. Considering this is obvious trolling or vandalism, I cannot assume this editor acted in good faith, and as such I would propose to save what we can save and nuke all other contributions by this user. Thadh (talk) 00:30, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Support. Only 76 contributions thankfully. Benwing2 (talk) 03:57, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Thadh: look at the edit history. They seem to have started with a copy of the Mon entry above it, swapped out the Mon language codes and changed the pronunciation to that of the word they had in mind, then changed the word "Mon" in the header and the category to "Eastern Pwo Karen", then replaced the language code for Proto-Mon-Khmer with the language code for Proto-Karen, then replaced "fish" with "aeroplane".
- I'm guessing this was someone with limited command of English who had no clue what they were doing. The word they had in mind probably starts with that letter but otherwise is spelled differently, and they also didn't grasp the concept of what the etymology was there for.
- I think they were editing in good faith- which is all the more reason to check everything they did... yikes! Chuck Entz (talk) 06:44, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
March 2024
[edit]@Leasnam, what's the attestation of this feminine form? -- Sokkjō 08:33, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
- Right here [[107]], first example is nominative plural, second is genitive plural Leasnam (talk) 14:19, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
- Copied from Wiktionary:Requests_for_deletion/Non-English#Κιωουία at the request of administrator. Please delete. ‑‑Sarri.greek ♫ I 18:51, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
Unknown word in Greek script by anon. It also appears at Kyiv#Translations. Discussed at Talk:Κιωουία Thank you. ++ And who is the Medieval author of Med.Latin Kiovia? ‑‑Sarri.greek ♫ I 14:26, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
Could the text (Latin) of the Ferrara-Florence Council be examined? And a Greek translation of it? Also, the texts for the creation of w:Metropolitanate_of_Kyiv? ‑‑Sarri.greek ♫ I 15:41, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Sarri.greek This belongs at WT:RFVN, not here. Theknightwho (talk) 13:52, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
Can this Pashto word be verified? Is this a dialectal form? I am not able to find this form in a Pashto dictionary. In Pashto dictionaries, I do find the word: 'maǵ' for "ram". Also, the IPA pronuncation and transliteration do not match the spelling. ElkandAcquerne (talk) 20:17, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
Arabic. Pinging creator @Fixmaster and nominator @Etisop for comment. Ultimateria (talk) 21:31, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
- Creator's comment: in Arabic, it' possible to create such compound time adverbs by sticking together ذاك or إذ together with ظرف زمان into إضافة construct as مضاف and مضاف إليه,I would create even more entries (like أسبوعئذ/أسبوعذاك for "that week") but decided to go only with those entries with إذ I could Google as mentioned in grammar explanation sources by Arab authors, e.g. with [108], and entries with ذاك are just their variations of entries with إذ I created (even if I didn't Google a mirroring entry with ذاك). The template for such derivation is very productive, one can google a ton of compound time adverbs (آنئذ/آنذاك, قبلئذ/قبلذاك, حينئذ/حينذاك, ساعتئذ/ساعتذاك, ليلتئذ/ليلتذاكetc., they're easily googlable). If one wants to remoce entries with ذاك (because they're theoretical and nobody used them in practice), it's fine. But every single entry with إذ should be definitely left since I managed to google and find them mentioned. Fixmaster (talk) 05:45, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
Old Tamil.
I'd like to see evidence for when the meaning extended from 'poet' to 'poem'. Moreover, I think most claims of particular Old Tamil words being attested in the Brahmi script are invalid or ineligible. --RichardW57m (talk) 11:59, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
Dutch. I know for a fact this term exists, but the page needs quotations regardless. -saph 🍏 21:42, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
Etruscan. Is this based on anything more than Isidore's 7th-century statement that "Lanista, gladiator, id est carnifex, Tusca lingua appellatus, a laniando scilicet corpora"? I feel like, while Isidore's alleged etymology would be reason enough to include this term in some work that aims to comprehensively discuss every scrap of potentially Etruscan linguistic material, it's incautious to have a mainspace dictionary entry on Wiktionary with a native-language spelling for this word if it is not otherwise attested. Even if the derivation of Latin lanista from Etruscan is accurate (which, if the only source is Isidore, is easy to doubt), it seems clear that the phonemic form of the Etruscan original might not have been exactly the same as that of the Latin word. The entry cites Pittau 2018's Dizionario della lingua etrusca, which seems to give the headword as "lanista" (in modern Roman script, not in the Etruscan alphabet). Pittau says "glossa latino-etrusca (ThLE 416)"; ThLE is not a primary source but another dictionary (Thesaurus linguae etruscae) that I haven't checked yet, and I don't know what gloss Pittau or ThLE is referring to.--Urszag (talk) 01:20, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
April 2024
[edit]Translingual. Rfv-sense: transgender.
I think it's time to delete this entry. The tag was added in 2022. We could move the ref to 'usage notes' with a note that Unicode gives it this meaning. However, that's based on the Unicode application for the symbol by Evans that didn't provide any evidence or attestation, so it's really just the say-so of a single person. Usually Unicode requires attestation from 2 authors and 2 publishers; I guess they were laxer back then. A number of meanings of alchemical symbols have been removed from the Unicode charts after scholars wrote in saying that those meanings don't exist, so Evans' original applications for the symbols are apparently not RS's. kwami (talk) 06:14, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
Lithuanian. Rfv-sense: All plural forms except accusative and locative.
In general, the declension of the plural of nouns in -us is quite different for hard stems and soft stems. Surely ỹlius should follow the pattern for soft stems (so nominative plural ỹliai) rather than for hard stems (whence *ỹliūs as given in the table.) The editing solution is to use {{lt-noun-m-ius-~}} instead of {{lt-noun-m-us-2}}. Notifying @Qehath in case he had evidence for the plural form *ỹliūs. --RichardW57m (talk) 09:29, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
Old English. Rfv-sense: This is a RFV for the capitalised term. Leasnam (talk) 23:00, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
- Since Insular script doesn't distinguish between upper and lower case, the choice between capitalized and uncapitalized spellings of Old English words is entirely editorial. I suppose the question then is whether there are modern editions that capitalize the Old English names of the runes. —Mahāgaja · talk 06:29, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
Lithuanian. Rfv-sense: Vocative singular of Lithuanian for John.
The vocative singular of personal names in -as ends in -ai; -e is the vocative singular ending for most common nouns in -as. This entry was based on the declension table at Jonas, which was generated from an a since-corrected template. --RichardW57m (talk) 15:59, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
- RFV-failed. --12:34, 1 November 2024 (UTC)
Although the etymology of Bengali -এ is said to be from Sanskrit, the definition given is ezafe, which is a Persianate grammatical particle corresponds to English of. However, the examples of its usage in a Bengali Wikipedia article indicates that -এ does not function as ezafe. Actually, ezafe is rarely used in Bengali outside certain stock phrases (e.g. শেরে বাংলা, literally "tiger/lion of Bengal", an epithet of A. K. Fazlul Huq). --Sbb1413 (he) (talk • contribs) 10:03, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
Lithuanian.
I have provisionally demoted this at the inflection table for pažastis (“armpit”).
https://morfologija.lietuviuzodynas.lt/zodzio-formos/pa%C5%BEastis says genitive plural is pažastų.--RichardW57 (talk) 07:08, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
Dutch. Supposedly an "Abbreviation of 's", among other things. That's obviously wrong. I think the intentionmay have been to say that comps or comp's, or maybe Comps or Comp's, is an abbreviation of ... an inflected or possessive form of "compagnie"? But the execution leaves much to be desired.... - -sche (discuss) 21:21, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
Lithuanian. Rfv-quote: "Tu mažas pydare, gali ateiti pas mane ir pasilinksminti bet kada."
I don't know if this is a real quotation or an invented example. (If the latter, we may need to drop it.) I like it because of the example of a vocative singular, for which it is good to confirm the form.
Quiet Quentin finds evidence of the lexeme in books, so no RfV. --RichardW57 (talk) 09:49, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
Lithuanian. Entry instrumèntas.
The accentuation marked on this entry, created by an IP without any evidence for intonation, contradicts what is given in the LKZ, namely instrumeñtas. If this entry be valid, this may pose issues for representing pronunciation, and of course, we will want to know its stress pattern so that its inflection can be shown properly. The entries linked to from its forms will also have to be updated. @Insaneguy1083, AmazingJus, 92.239.103.64. --RichardW57 (talk) 11:13, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
- Dabartinės lietuvių kalbos žodynas gives instrumeñtas as well, which would give /ɪnstrʊˈmʲæ(ː)ntɐs/. Indeed, that's the pronunciation on the Google Translate text-to-speech, and I think I've heard my Lithuanian language instructor say it like that as well. The person who wrote instrumèntas may have confused it with some other loanwords which do use è. Do with this information what you will. Insaneguy1083 (talk) 11:23, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
- @Insaneguy1083 I'm seriously confused by your purportedly phonemic notation, as some seem to think it is suitable to transcribe, as the rime of a closed syllable, /ɛˑn/ for <én> and /ɛnˑ/ for <eñ>. As far as I can make out, <èn> would then be /ɛn/. The phonetic matter at hand here is whether there is a 3-way contrast. --RichardW57 (talk) 12:20, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
- Compare sentimeñtas, given as [ˈsʲɛnʲtʲɪˈmʲæ̌ːntɐs]. Stressed <eñ> is pronounced as /æːn/. <èn> /ɛn/ sounds about right, given <ìn> /ˈɪn/. But I'm fairly certain instrumentas is <eñ>, not <èn>. I would trust the dictionaries on this one. I have yet to encounter <én>. Insaneguy1083 (talk) 12:45, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
- @Insaneguy1083: There's a discussion of the distinction between standard Lithuanian acute and circumflex on pp33-4 in Yuriy Kushnir's successful Ph.D. dissertation at http://yuriykushnir.com/documents/Y_Kushnir_Dissertation.pdf. (Beware that he transcribes Lithuanian, as can usually be told by the doubled vowels (one symbol per mora), in his own way, so uses only one type of accent mark.) Ignoring suprasegmentals, he contrasts spréndi (voc.s. of "spréndis") [sʲpʲrʲǽˑnʲdʲi] and beñdras [bɛńˑdras]. I think the acute accents denote expiratory force rather than pitch. He does remark that cicumflexes tend to be longer than acutes: the difference is that the length of the second element of circumflexes is more pronounced than the length of the first element of acutes. At Example 15 in https://home.uni-leipzig.de/~yuriykushnir/strucclith/class_2.pdf, the same author uses superscript tone accents to show the differences in (near) monophthongs: In that note he backs up most simple phonemic length differences with non-diacritic vowel aperture differences. --RichardW57 (talk) 18:32, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
- Compare sentimeñtas, given as [ˈsʲɛnʲtʲɪˈmʲæ̌ːntɐs]. Stressed <eñ> is pronounced as /æːn/. <èn> /ɛn/ sounds about right, given <ìn> /ˈɪn/. But I'm fairly certain instrumentas is <eñ>, not <èn>. I would trust the dictionaries on this one. I have yet to encounter <én>. Insaneguy1083 (talk) 12:45, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
- I agree with the possibility of confusion, or perhaps even misreading, but it could also possibly represent a reborrowing, which is why I've raised an RfV. The relevant editor might not be contactable at 92.239.103.64. --RichardW57 (talk) 12:20, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
- It's been 37 years since I studied this, but my understanding is that the acute and circumflex are two-mora accents, with the tonal peak on the first mora for acute and the second mora for circumflex, while the grave is a single-mora falling accent. That would mean only acute and circumflex contrast because the grave is only found on short syllables. In fact, I was taking Mandarin Chinese at about the same time, and I noticed that the grave had pretty much the same tonal contour in both languages: a rather sharp and short drop. I would also mention that long syllables include vowel+resonant, so "en" is a long syllable, and that the Lithuanian accents are quite different from the Ancient Greek ones that use the same diacritics. Chuck Entz (talk) 21:18, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
- @Chuck Entz: The first problem with that line of reasoning comes in the dative plural of dovanà (“gift”), namely "dovanóms", where the final syllable is overlong. Kushnir treats the two mora as being the start and end of the <o>, and regards the <m> as extra-moraic. The next is that as the first vowel of an acute syllable, <i> and <u> get the grave accent because they don't, in good Lithuanian, appreciably lengthen. The story told at w:Lithuanian accentuation#Not lengthening diphthongs is:
- In the acute cases of the diphthongs starting in i, u (i, u + l, m, n, r; ui), the first element does not lengthen and tense in a standard language, but an emphasis remains. Since it does not lengthen, the acute accent is marked by a grave. The first element of acute mixed diphthongs e, o + l, m, n, r of a foreign origin, does not lengthen as well: hèrbas – coat of arms, spòrtas – sport.
- When you take into account the more traditional per̃las and vérgas, we get a 3-way contrast. --RichardW57 (talk) 22:38, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
- @Chuck Entz: The first problem with that line of reasoning comes in the dative plural of dovanà (“gift”), namely "dovanóms", where the final syllable is overlong. Kushnir treats the two mora as being the start and end of the <o>, and regards the <m> as extra-moraic. The next is that as the first vowel of an acute syllable, <i> and <u> get the grave accent because they don't, in good Lithuanian, appreciably lengthen. The story told at w:Lithuanian accentuation#Not lengthening diphthongs is:
- It's been 37 years since I studied this, but my understanding is that the acute and circumflex are two-mora accents, with the tonal peak on the first mora for acute and the second mora for circumflex, while the grave is a single-mora falling accent. That would mean only acute and circumflex contrast because the grave is only found on short syllables. In fact, I was taking Mandarin Chinese at about the same time, and I noticed that the grave had pretty much the same tonal contour in both languages: a rather sharp and short drop. I would also mention that long syllables include vowel+resonant, so "en" is a long syllable, and that the Lithuanian accents are quite different from the Ancient Greek ones that use the same diacritics. Chuck Entz (talk) 21:18, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
- @Insaneguy1083 I'm seriously confused by your purportedly phonemic notation, as some seem to think it is suitable to transcribe, as the rime of a closed syllable, /ɛˑn/ for <én> and /ɛnˑ/ for <eñ>. As far as I can make out, <èn> would then be /ɛn/. The phonetic matter at hand here is whether there is a 3-way contrast. --RichardW57 (talk) 12:20, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
Persian. Rfv-sense: "shrine" (not in Dehkhoda). If it exists, probably just an occasional metaphor for a shrine as the saint's palace/court.--Saranamd (talk) 22:27, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- Synonyms listed as "مقبره,آستانه[109]" both meaning shrine Light hearted sam (talk) 14:37, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
Albanian. Rfv-sense: I believe "audiencë" only refers to "audience" as in "formal meeting with a dignitary", not as in "group of people seeing a performance". It's not clear on the Albanian entry which meaning it should be (it only seems to be made clear when looking at the (I believe incorrect) translation of the English term). --Antondimak (talk) 22:10, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- The Albanian Wiktionary gives only one meaning, that of a formal meeting. --Lambiam 20:30, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Sanskrit class 3 verb of root धिष् (dhiṣ, “to sound”). Mentioned in Apte's dictionary, but Monier-Williams says about the root: "Probably invented to explain dhiṣaṇā, speech, hymn". Exarchus (talk) 13:55, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
Albanian. Originally marked by @Neo204 for speedy deletion. Thadh (talk) 14:41, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Albanian. Originally marked by @Neo204 for speedy deletion. Thadh (talk) 14:42, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Same as above Thadh (talk) 14:44, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Translingual. Rfv-sense: I am not sure if this sarcastic usage of ":3" really is specific to the transgender community. I have seen plenty of cisgender people online use it as well. Mayhair (talk) 17:22, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- It was removed in diff. It indeed does not seem to be limited to trans communities or to be all that distinct from sense 1. - -sche (discuss) 04:30, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
Khmer. កាលបរិច្ឆេត (kaal paʼrəccheet)
It doesn't seem attestable, although Headley77 has it. The IP user claims the correct version is កាលបរិច្ឆេទ (kaal bɑɑrəcchaet). See talk.
Pls use http://sealang.net/khmer/ for [Headley77] or [Headley97] --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 08:14, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
May 2024
[edit]Ancient Greek. Listed in Liddell & Scott, who record it at P.Lond.3.909a.7, i.e. London Papyri vol. III n. 909a line 7 as far as I understand, which however does not seem to contain the word. The term itself isn't implausible so it may exist elsewhere, but I couldn't find it. We could resort to a dictionary-only terms' appendix. Catonif (talk) 17:19, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
- The same reference can be found here, referencing page 170 explicitly, so this is not directly copied from Liddell & Scott. Apparently, the term is also found, in the combination “κακ λαλ ἄλφα” meaning “ΚΛΑ”, in BGU 153.17,[110] so it is not a hapax legomenon. --Lambiam 14:21, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Malayalam. Tagged for RFD with the reason "Unsourced" by User:Illustrious Lock, but not listed there. Doubts about the existence of a term are the domain of RFV, though, so I've brought it here instead. —Mahāgaja · talk 21:01, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
Malagasy. Tagged but not listed by Corsicanwarrah (talk • contribs) over four years ago. —Mahāgaja · talk 12:19, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
- RFV-failed. —Granger (talk · contribs) 13:03, 22 September 2025 (UTC)
Thai.
Being an SOP. Just meaning "to vanish away", from หาย (hǎai, “to vanish”) + ไป (bpai, “away”).
--YURi (talk) 13:19, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
Indonesian. Rfv-sense:
The sense for 'eternal era' is quoted in KBBI
- "(nomina) masa yang kekal, tidak berkesudahan"
- "(noun) an eternal, unending time"
— This unsigned comment was added by Udaradingin (talk • contribs) at 18:11, 23 May 2024 (UTC).
- There's already a thread for this above. —Mahāgaja · talk 20:31, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
Translingual. Stumbling upon Wiktionary:Tea_room/2022/May#≬ while looking for something else reminded me of this entry and the general paucity of evidence for it being used to mean anything. - -sche (discuss) 04:17, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
Finnish. Nominated for speedy deletion by the creator, but it seemed like a case for RFV to me. Ultimateria (talk) 20:54, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
- Never heard during my 40+ years of office life. It appears to be real though, as it gets more than 2000 hits in a Google search. I think this should be kept, but I would simply translate it as "threat or opportunity". --Hekaheka (talk) 16:18, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
- It's good enough for YLE(https://areena.yle.fi/podcastit/1-50732114 and https://areena.yle.fi/podcastit/1-50564670) --Hekaheka (talk) 07:29, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
- It's only one independent source (since they're from the same podcast), but it'd count as a third source, if we count online sources for this entry. It remains to be decided whether we should (as in whether we think it's common enough to be kept). — SURJECTION / T / C / L / 14:51, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- It's good enough for YLE(https://areena.yle.fi/podcastit/1-50732114 and https://areena.yle.fi/podcastit/1-50564670) --Hekaheka (talk) 07:29, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
Claims to be "Old Kolami". Theknightwho (talk) 03:43, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
This IP added the entries gå knep dig selv, gå og knull deg selv, gå och knulla dig själv, which I've speedied as ungrammatical (can̈́'t use "gå" like English "go"), along with gå knulle deg selv by @Sniptopsail and knulla dig själv. I don't know anything about Czech or Slovak though, so I'll leave these here. May want to go through this user's contributions.__Gamren (talk) 19:35, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
Georgian.
User:Reordcraeft, a native speaker, says this term is incorrect.
See Talk:ჩაჩანი. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 19:51, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
June 2024
[edit]Translingual.
- i think this would qualify for deletion as per our previous decision not to include emojis whose only attestable meaning is the literal one. the person who created this page most likely didnt know that, as i'm not sure it's written as policy anywhere .... there was some discussion at one point though. —Soap— 19:19, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
- in fact the peson who created this RFV also created the entry, so again i think they must not have known about the nonliteral usage requirement. —Soap— 19:24, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
Tajik. — Fenakhay (حيطي · مساهماتي) 17:13, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
- RFV-failed. —Granger (talk · contribs) 08:41, 26 September 2025 (UTC)
Old English
Request for verification of the sense “fiend”. Following on from #werwulf, this word seems to be a hapax legomenon. Its occurrence in the four manuscripts of the one source may be seen at Citations:werewulf, wherein I assume the word means “werewolf”. I welcome any evidence that contradicts my suppositions, however. 0DF (talk) 17:57, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
RFV-Failed; sense deleted. 0DF (talk) 13:26, 23 September 2025 (UTC)
Pawnee. Just a non-existing form; also, there is already the correct asaáki. (I added the reference and some info to asakis at first not realizing that there was a correct entry too.) Amtin (talk) 16:35, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
Swedish. Rfv-sense:
sexually exhausted. This has been a running joke for a long time, possibly even pre-Internet, appearing on lists of unusual words. This doesnt rule out its existence, but w:sv:pömsig and external sites tell us that people using it sincerely are outnumbered by those using it as a mention ("you know what they say in Sweden?") and perhaps people using in fiction where accurate language usage is not required. also consider that Sweden is so thoroughly English-speaking that there might even be people exoticizing their own language. i apologize i cant really help with finding cites. if we do find cites, i still think we should have a usage note explaining that the derived usage is mostly found in artificial contexts. thanks, —Soap— 10:53, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
- we also have valuable information on talk:pömsig from a native speaker who i think expresses what i said better than i said it myself. —Soap— 11:07, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
- also, do we know offhand what the etymology for this word is? is it a children's language game, C1VC2C3-INFL > pVC2C1-INFL, a one-off deformation, or an unrelated word? Thanks, —Soap— 12:07, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
Scottish Gaelic. I only found ban-sìth, ban-sìthe, and bean-shìthe on Am Faclair Beag and LearnGaelic. --YukaSylvie (talk) 00:53, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, though sìdh is defined herein as an alternative form of sìth, and Am Faclair Beag does have leabaidh ban-sìdh, so the spelling is recorded. Maybe it should be modelled after the entry sìdh. –Konanen (talk) 13:12, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Mark (2003) has it. I'll add it to the entry. Thadh (talk) 14:55, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
Yiddish. Rfv-sense: "a greeting" (noun).
I suspect this was simply a mistake, as the entry was missing the interjection sense (i.e. when the word is used as a greeting). That's now been corrected, but I guess it's plausible it could be used as a noun to refer to greetings, in the same way English hello can ("I gave her a hello"). Theknightwho (talk) 15:31, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
{{R:yi:CYED}}glosses it exclusively as a noun meaning 'peace', but does provide some phrases in which it seems to mean 'a greeting', e.g. (op)gebn sholem 'extend a welcome to; shake hands' and entfern sholem 'return a greeting'. Interestingly, CYED does not mention it being used as a greeting at all; only sholem-aleykhem is listed as an interjection meaning "hello". Nevertheless, I'd be surprised if no Yiddish speaker had ever used sholem alone as a greeting. —Mahāgaja · talk 16:25, 13 June 2024 (UTC)- @Mahagaja I don't feel in a position to add quotations for Yiddish, but since it's an LDL either of those phrases would seem to qualify this sense for inclusion. Theknightwho (talk) 20:30, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- For a common noun one expects to find uses of a plural (שלומס?) While that term is found, the hits appear to be for the genitive of the proper noun. --Lambiam 20:39, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Albanian. Kërko emrin reports 61 women named Dita, so already not very common, and, in their phrasing, less that 10 people (which is likely nobody) named with the masculine equivalent Dit. Of course also not in {{R:sq:Dražić:2019}} nor {{R:sq:Kostallari:1982}}. Catonif (talk) 09:17, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
Welsh, = minimal pair. Yes, Welsh pâr = “pair”, but I've never heard of the alleged Welsh *minimol (“minimal”) and nor is it defined by Geiriadur Prifysgol Cymru. 0DF (talk) 16:25, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Llusiduonbach created the entry, maybe they know more. The word minimol isn't in GPC, but it is in Geiriadur yr Academi. That doesn't verify the existence of pâr minimol, of course, but at least it suggests the word isn't completely made up. —Mahāgaja · talk 19:44, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Mahāgaja: Thank you for bringing that to my attention. Is the presentation “minimol m|inimol” meant to indicate that it's stressed mínimol? Searching google books:"minimol" yields 4,660 results, which are too many to wade through for the Welsh ones, so I searched google books:"minimol" "yn" instead, which reduced the number to a more manageable 122, the first two of which are Welsh, which I quote:
- Peintiodd Sisley’r ddau ddarn yn ystod dwy flynedd olaf ei fywyd, pan oedd yn dioddef o ganser, ac maent yn dangos y brys a’r cyfansoddiad minimol yr oedd Monet yn eu darganfod yn Ffrainc yr un pryd.[111]
- Painted in the last two years of Sisley’s life, when he was suffering from cancer, they display the urgency that was being discovered at the same time in France by Monet.
- Lleihau faint o ddefnyddiau sydd eu hangen drwy ddefnyddio dylunio minimol a pheidio ag ychwanegu nodweddion dylunio diangen.[112]
- Reducing the quantity of materials which are needed by using minimal design and not adding unneeded design features.
- The first one has a parallel English translation, which I used; however, it's a free-ish translation which omits the “a’r cyfansoddiad minimol” of the Welsh, which I would render “and the minimal composition”.
- So Welsh minimol is attestable, although it strikes me as non-standard. Pâr minimol is a pretty straightforward calque of minimal pair, but google books:"pâr minimol" does not evidence its existence. Not everything is on Google Books, however. 0DF (talk) 02:59, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not sure I would call something listed in a print dictionary published by Bangor Univeristy on behalf of the Welsh Language Commissioner "nonstandard", but it could certainly be labeled
{{lb|cy|rare}}if someone were to make a dictionary entry for it. Also, at [113] it says, "The vertical line | in a Welsh word indicates that the main stress falls on the vowel following it", so yes, m|inimol means it's pronounced /ˈmɪnɪmɔl/. —Mahāgaja · talk 07:06, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not sure I would call something listed in a print dictionary published by Bangor Univeristy on behalf of the Welsh Language Commissioner "nonstandard", but it could certainly be labeled
- @Mahāgaja: Thank you for bringing that to my attention. Is the presentation “minimol m|inimol” meant to indicate that it's stressed mínimol? Searching google books:"minimol" yields 4,660 results, which are too many to wade through for the Welsh ones, so I searched google books:"minimol" "yn" instead, which reduced the number to a more manageable 122, the first two of which are Welsh, which I quote:
- @Mahāgaja: Thank you. No, to be clear, I wasn't advocating that we "officially" call the term nonstandard, but only saying that it "feels" nonstandard to me. 0DF (talk) 15:58, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
- @0DF: Upon further reflection, I think if an entry is created for it, "formal" might be a better label than "rare". My impression is of a word that's used in writing, particularly in certain specialized fields, but not really used in conversation or more casual writing. —Mahāgaja · talk 16:34, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Mahāgaja: Thank you. No, to be clear, I wasn't advocating that we "officially" call the term nonstandard, but only saying that it "feels" nonstandard to me. 0DF (talk) 15:58, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Mahāgaja: Yes, but I think "technical" better fits that usage. 0DF (talk) 14:23, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
Ancient Greek
RFV for the Attic Greek spelling ἀπέταλος; the Ionic Greek spelling, ἀπέτηλος, is attested in the feminine accusative singular absolute (ἀπέτηλον) and the feminine nominative singular comparative (ἀπετηλοτέρη) in Koine Greek sources. Katharevousa ἀπέταλος (apétalos) is acknowledged to exist, but is that Attic form attested earlier, perhaps during the Byzantine Greek period? Beware Google Books' OCR errors when searching old Greek texts; e.g., this purported instance of ἀπέταλος is in fact ?ἀπέϛειλες and this one supposedly of ἀπετάλου is in fact ἀπεϛάλϑαι. 0DF (talk) 14:20, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- Discussion moved from WT:RFDO.
Polish. Protologism/neologism that is barely attested and only limited to internet usage. The exact definition of the term is nowhere to be found. JimiY☽ru 07:20, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- I've added two cites from journal-sites for now. There are plenty of other Internet hits, which we sometimes accept according to WT:CFI. It's definitely not a protologisms, it's been around since at least 2019 based on the sources. The current definition is fine based on the quotations. Vininn126 (talk) 07:55, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- I've also added a mention from Poradnik językowy. Vininn126 (talk) 08:06, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
Albanian. Deleted out of process. Thadh (talk) 15:42, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Attested in Oxford Albanian-English Dictionary by Newmark, maybe be archaic. Chihunglu83 (talk) 23:41, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
Odia (Oriya) characters with nuqta
[edit]There are several entries in the Odia (Oriya) writing system such as କ଼, ଖ଼, ଗ଼, ଜ଼, ଝ଼, ଫ଼ and ଷ଼ and there is potential for more. It should be noted that a similar argument was submitted for the ICANN's Root Zone LGR for the Odia script in 2018. I was involved in this public consultation and interviewed several linguists, Odia-language experts including university professors, and Unicode and other technology experts. The outcome of these conversations affirming that the existing କ, ଖ, ଗ, ଚ, ଜ, ଫ suffice for all loanwords and other languages sharing the Odia script are documented in two white papers (1 and 2). At the end, the proposed nuqta combination to କ, ଖ,ଗ, ଚ and ଜ were discarded on the basis of non-availability of citable resource nor widespread use, and only ଡ and ଢ nuqta combinations were allowed. Interestingly, all the nuqta combined non-widely used Odia characters in question (କ଼, ଖ଼, ଗ଼, ଜ଼, ଝ଼, ଫ଼ and ଷ଼), except ଗ଼ which was created by a non-native speaker, were created by IP users. These characters do not comply with any of the attestation criteria. They should be deleted or redirected to existing equivalents. Psubhashish (talk) 22:57, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
July 2024
[edit]Gaulish. Is it actually attested, or should it be moved to Reconstruction: space? —Mahāgaja · talk 16:55, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- “benna”, in William Smith et al., editor (1890), A Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities, London: William Wayte. G. E. Marindin
quotes Festus: “Benna lingua Gallica genus vehiculi appellatur, unde vocantur combennones eadem benna sedentes.”
lingua Gallica = in/from the Gallic/Gaulish language. Let's discuss if this qualifies as Latin or Gaulish. Similar cases: - --2003:DE:3717:71DD:A495:E64D:4F92:290C 21:03, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
- So it's not attested in a Gaulish-language text; it's attested in a Latin text that says "The Gauls call this benna". I don't know whether Wiktionary has a settled custom on how to treat attestations like that; it's a gray area. —Mahāgaja · talk 18:00, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
Khmer. --kc_kennylau (talk) 13:49, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
Dutch, only RFV concerning the label 'regional'. Regional (Belgian) variants that no doubt exist are: gelle, golle, gulle, gijlie, gellie. But 'gijlui zijt' in Google Search only gives 3 results: 2 books from 19th century (so archaic) and Wiktionary. Exarchus (talk) 20:33, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
- By the way, the translation of 'Gijlieden zijt' as 'You lot are' at gijlieden is inappropriate as the most common context where you would find that phrase is in archaic bible translations. Exarchus (talk) 21:20, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
- I think this is indeed not regional: [114] (Dutch author born in Amsterdam, putting the word in the mouth of Hendrickje Stoffels, addressing Rembrandt in plain Dutch); [115] (Utrecht-based author in a Dutch literary magazine published in Amsterdam, putting the word in the mouth of an inhabitant of the Veluwe who speaks plain Dutch); [116] (article in an Amsterdam-based weekly magazine by a doctor, putting the word in the mouth of a woman speaking plain Dutch). --Lambiam 22:00, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Lambiam My first idea when asking this question was actually whether this was used in any region today (like 'gelle' etc. no doubt is). But maybe the intention of that label was simply to say that 'gijlui' is/was archaic, but only in certain regions. That might still be true, because your first two examples are from people from the province of Gelderland. It was definitely more colloquial than 'gijlieden'. Exarchus (talk) 06:30, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- From Gelderland, but in one case a speaker born in 1626 and fictionally speaking in 1642, and for the other case a fictional character born around 1743 and speaking in 1808, so this is not helpful for deciding regional use today. --Lambiam 07:11, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- True, I think note 6) in the Dutch personal pronouns template needs rewriting, because it suggests that 'gijlui' or 'gijlieden' are commonly used in that form. Exarchus (talk) 07:20, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- From Gelderland, but in one case a speaker born in 1626 and fictionally speaking in 1642, and for the other case a fictional character born around 1743 and speaking in 1808, so this is not helpful for deciding regional use today. --Lambiam 07:11, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Lambiam My first idea when asking this question was actually whether this was used in any region today (like 'gelle' etc. no doubt is). But maybe the intention of that label was simply to say that 'gijlui' is/was archaic, but only in certain regions. That might still be true, because your first two examples are from people from the province of Gelderland. It was definitely more colloquial than 'gijlieden'. Exarchus (talk) 06:30, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
Eastern Mari. I didn't find it in any of the dictionaries I have as a reference. Stríðsdrengur (talk)
- @Stríðsdrengur: Found one mention here. Thadh (talk) 13:33, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- Ah, I misread, it's actually шереҥге with a ҥ. Pretty sure old orthographies used н instead of ҥ though, so I'm sure this form is also findable. Thadh (talk) 13:37, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
Hindi. Rfv-sense: Noun. Occurs in dictionaries {{R:Platts}} and {{R:hi:McGregor}}, I suspect it may be because the Arabic etymon is a noun. --Svartava (talk) 14:52, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
Probably simply a term used in a Latin text, interpreted by Köbler as maybe having OHG origin. That's anyway how I interpret his entry given his 'Quelle' is the same Latin text with the first Latin attestation. There's no 'fello' at https://awb.saw-leipzig.de/?sigle=AWB&lemid=A00001.
If *fillō/fillijō is too dubious as etymology for Latin 'fello', then I'm fine with having no entry for it, but it's at least a common reconstruction.
pinging @Victar, @Leasnam Exarchus (talk) 17:11, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
- And in case there would be any doubt: does one really think adfadumire, mallobergus, mortuadus etc. are bona fide Old High German simply because they occur in Köbler's dictionary? (that's why there's "lat.-ahd.?") Exarchus (talk) 18:08, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
Old Frisian noun. I can only find attestations for the adjective, as Old Frisian fatt, fet. Leasnam (talk) 20:46, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
August 2024
[edit]Coptic. Created by an anon. Since it derives from Ancient Greek Ἀρσινόη (Arsinóē), I can't help but wonder if the creator made a typo and this entry should actually be at ⲁⲣⲥⲓⲛⲟⲏ (arsinoē). —Mahāgaja · talk 14:35, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Mahagaja: some context may help: the IP is part of a block belonging to the Baltimore County, MD public school district (see Special:Contributions/69.67.80.0/20). It looks to me like someone has made a hobby of transliterating between scripts. Chuck Entz (talk) 05:01, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
Belarusian. Łacinka is obsolete, any entry in this alphabet must have references, @Insaneguy1083 as creator. — This unsigned comment was added by Наименее Полезное (talk • contribs) at 15:50, 6 August 2024 (UTC).
- I don’t think so, it’s a common word. For our less-Slavic readers: Used anywhere where English uses compounds with mountain. It is excluded a priori that no botanical or zoological word came out in the Latin alphabet that has it. Fay Freak (talk) 16:33, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
- I formally added three Łacinka quotations from three books published by different authors in this diff. But the Łacinka spelling can be always derived from its contemporary Cyrillic spelling at least after 1918, because we know the exact conversion rules. --Ssvb (talk) 05:25, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
- Maybe this could already be resolved? I believe 3 Łacinka quotations (in main article, горны (hórny)) should be enough to prove this form is indeed correct.
- For more examples, here's this word used in 2024: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F4y0dkKuTRE (“JAK NABYĆ HORNY ROVAR” is used to translate “How to Buy a Mountain Bike”). Хтосьці (talk) 09:56, 17 April 2025 (UTC)
Persian.
Not in Dehkhoda or Steingass. Added by problematic user Irman.--Saranamd (talk) 06:22, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
Serbo-Croatian. smallpox
Is this correct? From what I can find, this is a term for chicken pox (i.e. the disease caused by the varicella virus). Theknightwho (talk) 16:10, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- In ticket:2024080410004938 (wiktionary VRT queue) a reader writes in, "
The word Kozice in Croatian means small shrimp, small goat or small pox. But on wiki dictionary it’s listed as ‘smallpox’ with a link to smallpox the disease. The has led to many menus in Croatia for many years adding the word smallpox to their menus as Google translate uses this definition.
". I have not researched this personally. Xaosflux (talk) 01:27, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Theknightwho: I think it means pox in general, amongst a selection of other terms, chickenpox being vodene kozice / водене козице, and vodene koze / водене козе, hence derived term from the former simple kozičav / козичав ‘pox-ridden, pockennarbig, blatternarbig’ in a 1898 field record of an Austro-Hungarian doctor practising in Bosnia, though he glossed the former restrictedly chickenpox while the latter smallpox.
- Contextually then of course it can mean one specific disease:
- 1996, Sibila Petlevski, Moj Antonio Diavolo / Francuska suita, Fraktura, published 2007, →ISBN, page 109:
- “Pa to su kozice. Obične vodene kozice. Zar ih nisi imao kad bio mali?” […] Lječnik je samo potrvdio pretpostavku i zapisao dijagnozu: varicella u dobro razvijenoj formi. […]
- “’Tis pox. Common water-pox. Hadst thou not had them when thou wast a child?” […] The physician but affirmed the assumption and wrote the diagnosis: Low-grade Varicella. […]
- Reliable native-speaker’s Ivan Štambuk gloss is naturally not completely off the wall, but his taxonomic distinctions were limited and coverage of vulgar designations for infectious diseases basic. He added words that he knew fast without possibly disserting the semantic ranges when he would have needed biological reference. Sometimes when the sample size is large enough only you find that specificity is wrong. Fay Freak (talk) 14:24, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
Belarusian. It is not verifiable in dictionaries that I know, corpus, books, etc., and it is also not in my daily use. Наименее Полезное (talk)
- @Наименее Полезное: The academic dictionaries are very sterile and censored. I have added some quotations from Google Books. Also there's a page in Vacłaŭ Łastoŭski's dictionary from 1924, which suggests to translate the Russian "залупа" as "залупіна" or "чапец". --Ssvb (talk) 19:40, 28 October 2024 (UTC)
Ancient Greek. Rfv-sense: fishhook (etymology 2). Apparently listed in Beekes' etymological dictionary, but I can't find it in any general dictionary. All dictionaries list only the sense of etymology 1. —Mahāgaja · talk 20:08, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
- It's a Hesychian word. I think we include these. @AntiquatedMan. I still think we should have a category for them. —Caoimhin ceallach (talk) 20:41, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, Hesychian lemma's are usually treated as an exception, and can be included. Of course, if it can be proven to be connected to the other meaning, e.g. as 'bait, promised reward' rather than 'fish hook', that would make the case stronger. BTW, on Logeion the sense is included in the LSJ entry.
- As concerns categorization, I would be in favor of a 'Hesychian lemma' category, perhaps even more so if nested in a larger 'lexicalist/lexicon' category, together with e.g. (the) Suda. AntiquatedMan (talk) 07:27, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- I also wonder if we can invoke some sort of metathesis to connect it to e.g. Arabic ʔibra 'needle'. Of course, we would need to find a source that proposes such an etymology to include it. AntiquatedMan (talk) 10:20, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
I can't find this word in any dictionary. — This unsigned comment was added by Rakso43243 (talk • contribs).
Sanskrit. The root स्वर्द् (svard) is mentioned in Monier-Williams, but is apparently not attested. Exarchus (talk) 06:44, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
Sanskrit. Mentioned in Monier-Williams for a root विद् (vid) meaning "to consider as, take for". Apparently used in Bhaṭṭikāvya, a poem intended to give examples of Pāṇini's grammar. Would that count as a valid enough attestation? Exarchus (talk) 08:05, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
Sanskrit. Mentioned in MW, not attested. Mayrhofer says about the supposed root पिञ्ज् (piñj): "ist wohl nur Konstruktion" (under lemma piṅgalá-). Exarchus (talk) 10:51, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
German. Rfv-sense: (slang, term of address) neo-nazi, right-wing extremist
Never heard of this before, not in the usual dictionaries and a quick Google search didn't turn up much either. — Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 17:09, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
- I think there's enough proof in the fact that they themselves call their groups "Freie Kameradschaften", as well as referring to each other by the term in prison. Eilidhmax (talk) 21:17, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- That's from the sense comrade (fellow, companion). --01:02, 5 October 2024 (UTC) — This unsigned comment was added by 2003:de:3700:a0e7:955d:2988:8b5e:44e1 (talk).
- Nazis calling each other "friend" does obviously not attest a sense of "Nazi" for "friend". — Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 22:44, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
September 2024
[edit]Lashi. This seems to only be true for one specific Bible translation that is probably not even accepted by the speakers. Hardly something to make an entry for. Thadh (talk) 21:48, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
Old Prussian
[edit]en.WP gave it as Perkunis; Nesselmann only has percunis (“thunder”). --10:24, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
Not in Nesselmann; possibly Neo-Prussian conlang (en.WP/de.WP). --10:24, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
(Tagged long ago, doesn't seem to be listed here, cp. also Category:Requests for verification in Old Prussian entries.) --10:24, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
@Beobach972. Nesselmann: "daian acc. sg., daians acc. pl.". --18:54, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
--18:54, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
--18:54, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
Nesselmann has jous (jaus, yous, joes). --10:24, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Withdrawn (because of [117] & src text). RFV-resolved. --13:32, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
Nesselmann has "tan-s" (i.e. tans). --10:24, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Withdrawn (because of [118] & src text). RFV-resolved. --13:32, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
Rfv-sense; not in Nesselmann. --10:24, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Long enough unattested; RFV-failed. --20:49, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
Rfv-sense; Nesselmann has wyr-s, wir-s (i.e. wyrs, wirs) (“male man, male adult human being”). y isn't correct (also not ÿ, but ij or maybe ij), but that's unrelated to the sense(s). --10:24, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Long enough unattested; RFV-failed. --20:49, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
@JimiYoru. Rfv-sense; Nesselmann has ackewystin (acc.) (“public”) and ackywistu, akiwysti (adv.) (“public”). --10:24, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Long enough unattested; RFV-failed. --20:49, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- I browsed through Nesselmann's dictionary, and as much as he does mention certain sources he allegedly based the entries on, these references appear to be incorrect, eg. pointing at pages in Enchiridion that do not mention the specific word. The spellings/forms in my Old Prussian entries are based to a significant extent on the most reliable source – The Third Catechism, aka Enchiridion, as the facsimiles are available online. Basically, I'm following the rule of ad fontes. I question the verity of Nesselmann's forms. JimiY☽ru 06:28, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
- Fair point for ioūs and tāns (like it also is for the spelling of ackijwistu and wijrs), hence these two RFVs withdrawn. --13:32, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
Scottish Gaelic. Added back in 2013. Mark (2003) and LearnGaelic state that the only term is beithe (with a final -e). Dwelly has one hit for the form without an -e, but are we sure it's an actual alternative form and not a misspelling? @Mahagaja, SaoiDunNeachdain, who could give some insight into this. Thadh (talk) 00:03, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Am Faclair Beag lists beithe as the simple form, but uses beith in compounds, including:
- so at the very least it could be called a combining form. Variation between beith and beithe in this word seems to go back at least as far as Middle Irish [119], so it's not hard to imagine there may be dialects of Scottish Gaelic (perhaps the moribund or extinct ones closest to Ireland) where beith is used in isolation, though I can't prove that. —Mahāgaja · talk 07:14, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- All right, if we won't find any evidence for an isolated use, I'll convert the entry to a combining form. Thadh (talk) 12:13, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- apologies, I never saw this notification at the time.
- Alternation between words with -e or -a /ə/ ending and without is common in Gaelic. This can sometimes be a dialectal difference. In the currently widely spoken dialects, there is a trend in Lewis dialect to drop schwa endings whereas they are retained (or even epenthetic) in Harris, Uist, Skye, Tiree, and become [ʌ] in Barra. (I'm not certain what the trend in Islay is, I know very little about that dialect.) It is a phonetic difference akin to the dropping of schwa in Romance languages, e.g. beatha which is /b̥ɛh/ in Lewis is still written with the schwa ending. If Colin Mark considers beithe to be the fundamental form, then I'll go along with that. Personally I have hardly ever heard beithe in the isolated nominative form anyway, it is more often part of the compound "craobh-beithe" (birch tree). SaoiDunNeachdain (talk) 17:56, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
- All right, if we won't find any evidence for an isolated use, I'll convert the entry to a combining form. Thadh (talk) 12:13, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
Arabic. Unattested. Created by @Fixmaster. — Fenakhay (حيطي · مساهماتي) 03:20, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
Arabic. Unattested. Created by @Fixmaster. — Fenakhay (حيطي · مساهماتي) 03:21, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
Yiddish. I don't doubt that colloquially it might be used, a la ביטע (bite), but I went through two dictionaries and couldn't find it. If anyone finds it in the CYED or CEYD, then we should be good. Insaneguy1083 (talk) 20:34, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
- [120]. Yiddish is LDL. Thadh (talk) 20:54, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
Kyrgyz. factory farm
. Not seeing many hits. Theknightwho (talk) 23:13, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
SOP, together with zamykać na klucz. Leifturstríð (talk) 00:56, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
Vietnamese. Sense: synonym of ngừng (“to stop; to halt”) MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 02:41, 20 September 2024 (UTC)
- I think it's really a synonym of "ngừng" e.g. ngừng di chuyển = ngưng di chuyển, ngừng lại = ngưng lại, ngừng động = ngưng động, ngừng thở = ngưng thở, etc. You can verify it using Google if you're skeptical. HungKhanh0106 (talk) 04:19, 10 April 2025 (UTC)
- It’s hard to distinguish use of ngưng from sloppy editing, through. I found several news articles using mostly ngừng and just sometimes ngưng, seemingly without distinction. I added one quote from an article that consistently uses ngưng for a while, but later in the piece they switch to ngừng, as if someone else took over the writing there.
- And then there’s someone here who says ngừng means “to stop” while ngưng means “to interrupt”, so not exactly the same.
- – MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 03:50, 8 July 2025 (UTC)
Resolved by PhanAnh123. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 08:47, 7 November 2025 (UTC)
Esperanto.
— This unsigned comment was added by Rakso43243 (talk • contribs) at 06:35, 28 September 2024 (UTC).
- Added 3 quotes. Request another person's verification before closing. TranqyPoo (talk) 16:00, 24 October 2025 (UTC)
Persian. Rfv for 'Etymology 2', sense "to save". I can't find this in Steingass or Hayyim, and Dehkhoda seems to indicate it as Pahlavi ("پهلوی"). By the way, I'm not sure what the Middle Persian pronunciation should be, MacKenzie gives /bōxtan/. The etymology section apparently uses Avestan script for Middle Persian... Exarchus (talk) 21:05, 29 September 2024 (UTC)
- It is worth noting that this entry was first added by the now-blocked user Irman, whose talk page is filled with various instances of his fabrications and mistakes. The fa-regional template is also clearly incorrect, with the Tajik spelling бахтен (baxten) being obviously wrong (it would be spelled بختین in the Arabic script, being a totally different word and contrary to the norms of Persian infinitive forms). Samiollah1357 (talk) 08:08, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
October 2024
[edit]Icelandic. Highly suspicious, as Icelandic is normally highly puristic and this word does not seem to exist as a learned borrowing in any other language. --2A02:FE1:9293:F00:903E:CB02:58A2:F859 13:01, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
- Does exist (newspaper: [121], 144 hits for "dormaði" in print publications) but it's not common nowadays. According to Íslensk orðsifjabók it's seemingly Germanic in origin rather than a learned borrowing, although perhaps influenced by Latin. 130.208.182.103 16:42, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
- A Germanic cognate may be provided by Middle High German türmen (“to become dizzy”), which the Brothers Grimm[1] connect with dialectal Northern English dorm (“to be half asleep”); dialectal Swedish dorma (“to be half asleep”); Norwegian durma, dorma (“to doze”); Icelandic dorma itself; Norn dwarm (“to doze”) [at least, I assume the abbreviation schetl. = schetländisch refers to Norn, though it could also refer to the Shetland dialect of Scots]; Faroese durva (“to doze off, try to stay awake”). Hungarian durmol (“to nap, snooze”) is apparently a Germanic loanword. Pokorny[2] connects türmen more distantly with Norwegian dusa (“doze”), Old Norse dúsa (“keep still”), dús (“lull (in wind), dead calm”), dúra (“sleep”). Our entry for Proto-Germanic *dusāną covers some of these. —Mahāgaja · talk 17:58, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
- Not so suspicious I think. The word exists as a learned borrowing in Norwegian in the exact same way as the entry made by the admin and native Icelandic speaker @BiT:.
- Teodor (d • c) 14:07, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
- References
- ^ türmen
- ^ Pokorny, Julius (1959), “dheu̯es-, dhu̯ē̆s-, dheus-, dhū̆s-”, in Indogermanisches etymologisches Wörterbuch [Indo-European Etymological Dictionary] (in German), volume 1, Bern, München: Francke Verlag, pages 268-271
Comox. Rationale: "Comox does not appear to have case in this alphabet." Ultimateria (talk) 19:46, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
Hindi. Looks like a dictionary-only word, not able to find enough usages in Google Books. --Svartava (talk) 15:19, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
Persian. The entry for نوک (nvak) appears to at least have an incorrect latinisation and vocalisation, given that Persian does not have any initial consonant clusters. Additionally, having checked a number of dictionaries and resources, I cannot find "wife of one's husband's brother" as a definition of any term with this spelling. For example, see Dehkhoda Dictionary, New Persian–English dictionary, and Vazhaju. Samiollah1357 (talk) 06:55, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
Old High German. Just the headword form krig. The only place I can find this is [here] (along with kriag). If it does exist, is it prevalent enough to be used as the main entry ? Leasnam (talk) 18:24, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
German. Special:WhatLinksHere/-esisch is empty and Category:German terms suffixed with -esisch doesn't exist, possibly for good reasons. — This unsigned comment was added by 2003:de:3700:a0c9:b024:34b7:bcda:4c60 (talk) at 17:50, 9 October 2024 (UTC).
- I'm not sure how to verify the existence of a suffix. I think this should probably go to WT:RFD instead. —Mahāgaja · talk 20:25, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- Possibilities as for attestion:
- Providing sources (grammars, dictionaries) which give -esisch as suffix. But well, that alone isn't really sufficient.
- Providing derived terms. But many terms ending in esisch are better explained as (term + -ese) + isch, e.g. taiwanesisch (synonym: taiwanisch) as Taiwanese (Taiwan + -ese) + -isch. That's similar to how Biologin isn't bio- + -login but Biologe (Biolog) + -in. --07:35, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Possibilities as for attestion:
Old Prussian. Reference: "Pruska n. *Stabegude złożona, por. prus. stabis 'kamień', lit. stabas 'posąg', łot. stabs i prus. gudde 'krzaki, krzewy'." (notice the *). --07:18, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
Saterland Frisian. Not in SW, not in NT, can't find it anywhere except the wiki world. Thadh (talk) 13:06, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- seeltersk.de, mentioning P. (= Pyt) Kramer. But well, the original source could already be gone and then wasn't durably archived (WT:CFI)... --14:34, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Interesting, because the mirrored book seems to contain oubieldje (with a hgih /iː/) instead, which also seems to correspond to SW's basic verb bíeldje. But it doesn't seem to be a typo, since it appears three times in the first source; Mistake or alternative form? Thadh (talk) 14:42, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Such variant spellings are IMO a predictable effect of the lack of a standardized orthography. --Lambiam 19:34, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Interesting, because the mirrored book seems to contain oubieldje (with a hgih /iː/) instead, which also seems to correspond to SW's basic verb bíeldje. But it doesn't seem to be a typo, since it appears three times in the first source; Mistake or alternative form? Thadh (talk) 14:42, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
Czech. Maybe a bit more technical - I believe a note ("nota") is a symbol for a tone ("tón"), not the tone itself. For example "nota C" should mean "the C note" as in "the notational symbol for the C tone". Does this vary across different languages? CaptainPermaban (talk) 19:41, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- I'd be curious what various Czech sources say. However, even if that sense is missing in those sources, that doesn't mean that it's not a real sense of the word. Ideally checking Google Books etc. should be done. Vininn126 (talk) 19:43, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- I can find relevant phrases in sources, but it's difficult to discern the meaning. Is "playing a note" the same as "playing a tone"? I guess people often use it interchangeably, but I am not sure whether it's enough to warrant treating the words as synonymous. CaptainPermaban (talk) 20:51, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- You might want to compare English note. Vininn126 (talk) 20:56, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- I can find relevant phrases in sources, but it's difficult to discern the meaning. Is "playing a note" the same as "playing a tone"? I guess people often use it interchangeably, but I am not sure whether it's enough to warrant treating the words as synonymous. CaptainPermaban (talk) 20:51, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
- Historically and etymologically, the term note in its musical sense referred to a mark representing a tone on a musical scale. Obviously, it can also be used metonymically to refer to that tone. The terms are not just synonyms; the expression to read notes cannot be replaced by to read tones; the metonymy is one-way. When we read, “
her high notes were off pitch
”,[122] it clearly refers to the tones. How would this be said in Czech? The equivalent of “the tones she sang for the high notes were off pitch”? --Lambiam 19:36, 13 October 2024 (UTC)- Replying to myself, some Googling shows that in this context of tones being off Czech systematically uses tóny and not noty, supporting the claim. --Lambiam 19:45, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
Nivkh. @kwamikagami I'm not sure where you got these.
cc @dylanvt, kaarkemhveel
-saph668 (user—talk—contribs) 10:05, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- There's enough bilingualism and consequent borrowing that they can show up a lot when Russian words are used. Gashilova 2017 does include them in its alphabet on page 6, as the 11th and 37th letters. Dylanvt (talk) 10:14, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- Huh. Do they give some equivalency? Also, should probably be added to the entries -saph668 (user—talk—contribs) 10:19, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- by equivalency do you mean like nativized forms? If so, there's nothing systematic in that regard. Gashilova 2017 just has a page at the beginning of the dictionary showing the alphabet, along with the note "the letters ж, ц, ш, щ are used in loanwords from Russian". Dylanvt (talk) 14:54, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- since they're only used in loans, I'm not sure they're needed. this is one of the problems with wording letters as 'nth letter of the X alphabet' [not my preferred wording], when there may be variants of the alphabet with and without letters for loans. kwami (talk) 17:44, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- Huh. Do they give some equivalency? Also, should probably be added to the entries -saph668 (user—talk—contribs) 10:19, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
Dutch. Rfv-sense: "(transitive) to speak, to say (especially in the southern part of the Netherlands)". Removed by IP. — SURJECTION / T / C / L / 14:17, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
- No verification, apparently. Probably because this meaning does not seem to exist. Like I (the IP in question) said in the edit comment: “Remove unsourced meaning added by User:Jamesjiao on 2009-09-02 in revision 7288680. I never heard of it (anecdata), and neither have any of the other dictionaries/aggregation sites (actual data: Van Dale, Encyclo.nl)” 78.23.192.69 21:30, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
Javindo. Entries with dubious (and at some points definitely wrong) etymologies, created without sources seemingly to support a highly unlikely set of descendants. (I have a feeling I know who the editor is, and if so, it shouldn't take too long for them to expose themselves.) — SURJECTION / T / C / L / 23:23, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
Cornish. —Mahāgaja · talk 09:29, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
Sanskrit. Mentioned by Pāṇini but not attested. It's actually not fully clear to me whether this is considered sufficient to pass the inclusion criteria for extinct languages (the guidelines speak about "entries based on a single mention"). Exarchus (talk) 20:40, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
Hindi. Rfv for adjective sense. --Svartava (talk) 19:13, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
Sanskrit. I'd like to know where this is attested, I suppose simply a modern use of the name somewhere. Exarchus (talk) 21:12, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
Kapampangan. Malformed and confusing entries added by an IP, but also entirely plausible. Are they real or not? This, that and the other (talk) 11:48, 24 October 2024 (UTC)
Sanskrit - no results in Google Books. – Svārtava (tɕ) 14:40, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
German. Rfv-senses, see entry. --2003:DE:371A:2285:BC8F:3FF1:BC08:3156 12:52, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
- Adelung gives: "Auch derjenige heißt zuweilen ein Holländer, welcher nach Niederländischer Art die Nutzung der Kühe pachtet, wo denn auch, das Verbum Holländern, diese Nutzung verpachten, üblich ist."
- DRW gives: "holländer heißt zuweilen wer die kühe auf einem landgut gepachtet hat"
- Grimm dictionary gives: "östlich von der Elbe der milchwirtschafter auf einem gute, meist pächter."
- Meyers about 'Holländerei': "Holländerei, in Norddeutschland eine Milchwirtschaft (Meierei) oder das Gebäude, in dem sie betrieben wird. Holländer heißt der Leiter der Wirtschaft. Die Bezeichnung stammt aus dem 11. und 12. Jahrh., wo sich Holländer, die mit der Milchwirtschaft vertraut waren, mehrfach in Deutschland ansiedelten und gewisse Vorrechte erhielten. In andern Gegenden Deutschlands spricht man in ähnlichem Sinne von Schweizereien."
- So those are at least related to the senses given. Maybe sense 3 ("the practice where animals are leased ...") is rather for 'Holländerei'? Exarchus (talk) 19:47, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
November 2024
[edit]Persian. Not in any dictionaries in Abadis.--Saranamd (talk) 09:46, 2 November 2024 (UTC)
- In
{{R:fa:Steingass}}with a different definition that could conceivably evolve over a century to mean "fall down, collapse": "ریستن, restan, rīstan, To spin, to twist." Vox Sciurorum (talk) 19:35, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
The Vedic forms like 'gámanti' are to be interpreted as from the aorist अगन् (ágan), see for example Mayrhofer. But I don't exclude it has been used as a present somewhere in later Sanskrit. Exarchus (talk) 11:13, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
German. Rfv-sense: Flemish (a group of Flemish dialects). Added by @Hans-Friedrich Tamke in diff; removed by Sarcelles in diff and by Surjection in diff without correct process, i.e. without a verification or deletion request.
Here are already some examples (post 1950) – are they sufficient?
- 1961, Karl Meisen, Altdeutsche Grammatik: I: Lautlehre, J. B. Metzlerische Verlagsbuchhandlung: Stuttgart, p. 11 ([123]):
- Auf nd. Boden wird das Anfr. abgelöst durch das Mittelniederländische (Mnl.) vom 13.Jh. bis etwa 1500 (Hauptdialekte sind seitdem Holländisch, Flämisch, Brabantisch, Limburgisch), [...]
- Jan Goossens, Niederländische Mundarten – vom Deutschen aus gesehen (mit 11 Karten im Text und einer Faltkarte); in: 1970, Jan Goossens (ed.), Niederdeutsches Wort: Kleine Beiträge zur niederdeutschen Mundart- und Namenkunde, vol. 10, Verlag Aschendorff: Münster, p. 67 and p. 78f.:
- Die ganze östliche Hälfte des ndl. Sprachgebiets nun hat Umlaut; nur das Flämische, das Seeländische und das Holländische kennen ihn nicht.
- Im Gegensatz zu den östlichen Mundarten haben die westlichen, das Flämische, das Brabantische und auch das Holländische, wesentliehen Anteil am Aufbau der ndl. Hochsprache gehabt.
- 2003, Georg Cornelissen, Kleine niederrheinische Sprachgeschichte (1300–1900): Eine regionale Sprachgeschichte für das deutsch-niederländische Grenzgebiet zwischen Arnheim und Krefeld: Met een Nederlandstalige inleiding, p. 11 ([124]):
- Im Mittelalter gab es allerdings noch keine Einheitsschriftsprache moderner Prägung, so dass der Begriff Mittelniederländisch – wie auch Mittelhochdeutsch – lediglich als Sammelbegriff zu verstehen ist: er ermöglicht die Zusammenfassung verschiedener regionaler Schreibsprachen. Das Flämische, Brabantische oder Holländische gehören hierher und auch die mittelalterliche Sprache des Raumes Arnheim-Kleve-Venlo-Krefeld – das „Niederrheinische“, wie es in diesem Buch heißt.
- 2004, Jeroen Van Pottelberge, Der am-Progressiv: Struktur und parallele Entwicklung in den kontinentalwestgermanischen Sprachen, Gunter Narr Verlag: Tübingen, p. 157 ([125]):
- Der Terminus „südniederländisch“ ist in erster Linie dialektgeographisch oder dialekthistorisch motiviert, weil sich die südlichen Mundartgebiete (das Flämische, das Brabantische und das Limburgische) auf beiden Seiten der Staatsgrenze erstrecken und sich historisch zuerst vom Latein und Französischen emanzipiert haben.
- Anne Begenat-Neuschäfer; in: 2009, Anne Begenat-Neuschäfer (ed.), Belgien im Fokus: Geschichte – Sprachen – Kulturen: 2: Comic und Jugendliteratur in Belgien von ihren Anfängen bis heute, Peter Lang: Frankfurt am Main, p. XVI ([126]):
- Auf der einen Seite stand das Französische als Kultursprache mit seinem Anspruch auf Universalität, auf der anderen galten die großen niederdeutschen Dialekte des Flämischen, Brabantischen, und Limburgischen, welche die Sprachunion mit dem Niederländischen als Schriftsprache in der ersten Hälfte des 19. Jahrhunderts noch nicht vollzogen hatten.
--2003:DE:3723:A697:1C3D:520:841B:4E6B 19:52, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
- For context, this editor, who is evading their block, is very likely a perennial POV pusher who cannot be at all trusted to define these terms correctly. Someone else has summed up their goal as "introducing obsolete concepts into articles to aggrandize (Low) German and diminish Dutch". — SURJECTION / T / C / L / 20:18, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
- This is a linguistic minefield. The meaning of the word “Flemish” is highly ambiguous (as is its Dutch equivalent “Vlaams”), and so should not be used as is in definitions. There are currently two senses, neither of which makes sense to me. The citations given by the “PoV pusher” seems to support a sense “the non-standardized dialects of only the former County of Flanders, i.e. the current provinces of West Flanders and East Flanders, Zeelandic Flanders and French Flanders” (copy-pasting from Wikipedia), and so could stay in as far as I’m concerned, provided the definition be cleaned up. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 02:43, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
- Notwithstanding, they are correct: Flämisch denotes both the standard language and the non-standard varieties of Flanders. In my view the quotations also clearly demonstrate this. —Caoimhin ceallach (talk) 00:08, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
- The quotations given demonstrate a sense “dialects of only the former County of Flanders”, which is quite different from the “non-standard varieties of [current] Flanders”. That’d be a third sense. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 03:06, 18 November 2024 (UTC)
Kazakh.
Tagged for speedy deletion by @Vtgnoq7238rmqco as not Kazakh. Granted, there are lots of "false friends" in various Arabic script Unicode blocks, but this should go through at least a minimal verification so it's not just one person's opinion. Chuck Entz (talk) 17:47, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
Hunsrik
[edit]Unsourced. Trooper57 (talk) 00:32, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
Australie in Boll's dictionary. Trooper57 (talk) 00:32, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
Not in Boll's dictionary, despite citing it. In fact, none of the colours listed at {{table:colors/hrx}} are in this dictionary. It only has entries for the adjectives. Trooper57 (talk) 00:32, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
Unsourced. Trooper57 (talk) 00:32, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
Dutch. Rfv-sense: "literature". Afaik this just means "literary studies", which makes sense given the suffix -kunde. — Mnemosientje (t · c) 12:48, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
- Phrases of the type “bloemlezing van de X letterkunde” typically refer to literature without there having to be any study. But it’s hard to truly separate the two senses. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 03:09, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
Translingual. Rfv-sense: "(mathematics) 3π". — SURJECTION / T / C / L / 07:04, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
- As far as I can tell, this originates from the w:Numberblocks community out of all possible things. Googling variants of "rho three pi" has only led me to a handful of Reddit or Fandom discussions about how this convention, is in fact, not in standard use (with the latter even attributing this and other names for multiples of π to some random user).
- Not sure what standard procedure is here, but I've chosen to be bold and removed this from the article. RFV-failed viiii (talk) 08:22, 7 December 2025 (UTC)
Icelandic. Rfv-sense: (vexillology) fly. I've checked all sources that I'm aware of. —Caoimhin ceallach (talk) 23:04, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
- This meaning is included in the major dictionary of Icelandic ("Íslensk orðabók", given as "fánareitur fjær stönginni") but not in any other work that I can find. Presumably an obsolete neologism or nonce word. 130.208.182.103 14:56, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks. I don't have access to Íslensk orðabók unfortunately. —Caoimhin ceallach (talk) 00:19, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
Sanskrit. Not mentioned in Monier-Williams, Apte or Macdonell. Exarchus (talk) 17:21, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
Malay. Rationale was "same pattern as from Duhose". Ultimateria (talk) 19:49, 17 November 2024 (UTC)
- I don't think the word exists at all in Malay, since I couldn't find it in the online dictionary of the Malay Literary Reference Centre. Only verifiable usage is from some Tiktok an Indonesian made that I found through a Google search — so its probably just a made up pseudo-English word.
- Perhaps to best have it requested for deletion, unless a native (Malaysian) Malay speaker can verify its colloquial use...? Myrrhabeaugh (talk) 00:34, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- I've commented on this somewhere down below - see lokesyen. Sponge2490 (talk) 08:50, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
Afrikaans, sense "shepherd", removed out of process by IP. — SURJECTION / T / C / L / 20:12, 17 November 2024 (UTC)
Swahili. Rfv-sense: gift, donation (something given to another voluntarily, without charge). MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 03:03, 18 November 2024 (UTC)
Swahili. Rfv-sense: to debate. Was added by @Science Bird. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 01:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
Persian. Rationale was "ungrammatical and unattested in publications". Ultimateria (talk) 18:48, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
- Seems to be a misspelling, but:
- Light hearted sam (talk) 11:48, 17 April 2025 (UTC)
Russian. Spread around the web when corpora where unimpressing. Fay Freak (talk) 17:25, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
German. Misspelling of abmessen.
@Alextejthompson
It's certainly misspelled but I don't think this is nearly common enough to warrant inclusion. Wiktionary:Criteria for inclusion § Misspellings — Fytcha〈 T | L | C 〉 22:26, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
Persian. Not in dictionaries.--Saranamd (talk) 07:45, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
- Apparently a kind of rhythmic Sistani/Baluch songs, not a game. Pronounced as sawt (سَوت/صَوت).[129] Light hearted sam (talk) 11:18, 17 April 2025 (UTC)
Icelandic. "Easter peace". Dates to 2008 but there's only one example in the RMH-2022 corpus: [130]
If we can't find 3 citations, we should delete it. Benwing2 (talk) 09:26, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
- Cited, used in Heimskringla which is discussed here. Here are also 5 examples of figurative usage. 130.208.182.103 10:32, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
- OK great, I will take this as cited. Benwing2 (talk) 11:32, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
- @Benwing2 This is more of a question than a comment: Are 800 year old Old Norse sagas really citable for Icelandic (considering we have a separate Old Norse tag)? I don't think I'd cite Birch bark letter no. 292 for Karelian, and I consider Northern Finnic languages quite conservative, phonologically and morphosemantically speaking. brittletheories (talk) 10:40, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Brittletheories You are right; Old Norse sagas are not valid citations for Icelandic any more than Chaucer is for modern English. But the 5 examples of figurative usage are modern, and do count. Benwing2 (talk) 11:10, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Benwing2 This is more of a question than a comment: Are 800 year old Old Norse sagas really citable for Icelandic (considering we have a separate Old Norse tag)? I don't think I'd cite Birch bark letter no. 292 for Karelian, and I consider Northern Finnic languages quite conservative, phonologically and morphosemantically speaking. brittletheories (talk) 10:40, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- OK great, I will take this as cited. Benwing2 (talk) 11:32, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
apparently non-existent terms on reconstruction pages
[edit]Terms that I wasn't able to verify:
- Old High German pīna at Proto-West Germanic *pīnā
- Middle Persian 𐫅𐫡𐫏𐫄 (dryɣ /darīğ/, “sorrow, suffering”) + Parthian 𐫅𐫡𐫏𐫃 (dryg /darīg/, “sorrow, suffering”) at Proto-Iranian *járati
Exarchus (talk) 10:09, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
- To be clear: I mean OHG pīna in the tree sense. Exarchus (talk) 11:55, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
Icelandic. Created by User:Hvergi, said to mean "tits" in a vulgar sense. Not in any dictionary I can find and I looked in the corpus [131] and the few hits from Twitter seem to refer to tournaments of some sort, not to women's breasts. Benwing2 (talk) 08:40, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
- Are these citable?
- [132] "Gugga er þrítug gella með sögu um sílíkon í brullunum" (YouTube video, timestamp 15:30)
- [133] "Ég held að karlmennirnir sem syntu á móti mér hafi átt afar skemmtilega sundferð þar sem brullurnar sátu úti eins og ekkert væri sjálfsagðara" (blog post)
- [134] "eða bara brullur, hvernig væri það?" (forum post)
- [135] "Brullurnar á þér eru að gera útaf við þig" (forum post)
- [136] "Noh, litla til hægri með glænýjar brullur!" (in a collapsed forum post by user YulBrynner) 130.208.182.103 09:26, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
- Great, thank you! All look to be plural; I wonder if you can cite any of them singular, if not maybe I should make it a plural-only word. Can you explain what things like this mean?
- "Voru brullur í stúkunni eftir leik ?" These are from [137]. Benwing2 (talk) 11:31, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
- It probably only exists in the plural, but there's nothing ungrammatical about a singular as such, similar to the equally vulgar English bazonga.
- All of the results from the RMH corpus are a slang shortening for brauðstangir (“breadsticks”), per [138][139] ("Voru brullur í stúkunni eftir leik?" is odd but the only way I can parse it is "Did you eat some breadsticks in the bleachers after the game?") 130.208.182.103 11:59, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
Icelandic. Created by User:BiT. Appears to be an Old Norse skaldic word appearing once. Need actual Icelandic cites. Benwing2 (talk) 11:25, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
Icelandic. Just like the last one, this is an Old Norse skaldic word apparently attested once meaning "a shower of arrows". Created by User:BiT. Benwing2 (talk) 11:36, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
Hawaiian.
This is said to be borrowed from an English cosmological term which was coined last year from a phrase in an old Hawaiian chant. Yes, this originally came from Hawaiian, but are Hawaiians using it as Hawaiian as opposed to just talking about the English term? Chuck Entz (talk) 02:42, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
Vietnamese. Rfv-sense: other person [than porter] doing such hard work as causes one to lean forward. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 03:41, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
Vietnamese. I think this is citable, but it’s hard to Google for with singer Thiên Kim clogging up the results. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 03:43, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
- I found plenty of citations for this term: [140], [141], [142], [143], [144] (note for cite 5: they use a Chinese proverb within a Vietnamese poem). Inferring from those poems, I think the sense is a bit messed up. HungKhanh0106 (talk) 04:26, 10 April 2025 (UTC)
Vietnamese. Tagged two years ago with reason: “Few (if any) actual example in Vietnamese, seems like another case of Sinitc words transcribed into Vietnamese using Sino-Vietnamese. Thiên Thượng Thánh Mẫu is attested but that's like saying nihilō is an English word because ex nihilo is used in English.” MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 03:44, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
- My search for "thiên thượng là" gives quite a lot of (mostly religious) citations. Duchuyfootball (talk) 13:58, 15 April 2025 (UTC)
Icelandic, meaning "tuft of hair". Created by User:BigDom. Not in BÍN or other resources. Found in https://ritmalssafn.arnastofnun.is/daemi/223680 in two cites, but they are not independent as they're both from the same book by the same author. We need three independent cites to prove this isn't just a nonce word made up by this one author. Benwing2 (talk) 07:48, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- One recent citation added. There are three citations I can find in total: [145] (page 5), [146] and [147], and it's mentioned in the Dictionary of Icelandic under "lýja". 130.208.182.103 08:03, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks. The first and third cites are identical; I assume you meant to paste in a different cite? Benwing2 (talk) 08:14, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, fixed ([148]) 130.208.182.103 10:57, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Great! I'll take this as cited but label it as rare, since we have only the bare minimum 3 cites you were able to find. Thanks again for all your help. Benwing2 (talk) 11:02, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, fixed ([148]) 130.208.182.103 10:57, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks. The first and third cites are identical; I assume you meant to paste in a different cite? Benwing2 (talk) 08:14, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- RFV-kept. @Benwing2 could you or the IP please add the quotations to the entry? Thadh (talk) 13:38, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
Icelandic. Created by User:BiT. This has six hits in MÍM, all of which are mentions (not uses) and all appear to stem from the same source (probably Wikipedia): [149] The normal term for Holy Week is dymbilvika. This feels like a protologism (creative invention) on someone's part. Benwing2 (talk) 08:12, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- Seems to just be a very rare obsolete term. From 1938: [150] "Dymbildagavika mun hún hafa verið kölluð, þó í almanökum sé nú nefnd dymbilvika." ("It was supposedly originally called dymbildagavika ..."). Included in a 1924 dictionary [151]. No actual uses that I can find. 130.208.182.103 11:12, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
Icelandic. Created by User:Numberguy6 (whose general record with Icelandic is not good). This is said to mean "Icelandic as spoken by Danes" and I'd expect a lot of hits, but a google search turns up only ~ 8, of which all but one go back to Wiktionary. The one that's independent is this: [152] but I can't find the mention of framsóknardanska on the page. Is this real or just a protologism? Benwing2 (talk) 09:57, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
- I'm also very doubtful about this term. In your source the term appears (under the heading Nordisk Roð) as the punchline to a humorous stanza, which is a very weak cite. There are a couple of forum posts where people seem to reference it [153][154][155] but given the 1) absolute lack of any "real" cites (especially given that it sounds like a concept that would have been discussed/lampooned quite a lot in the early 20th century), 2) the fact that no one I asked this morning (including older speakers) have ever heard of this, and 3) the fact that these forum posts all post-date 2015, I'm voting for this being a protologism invented by comedian Ari Eldjárn in his 2015 standup (timestamp 1:20): "Icelanders speak something which for a lack of a better word is called framsóknardanska" [156] 130.208.182.103 11:52, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
December 2024
[edit]Sanskrit. This present verb is mentioned by Monier-Williams and Whitney, but the Rigvedic form 'móṣathā' is nowadays interpreted as aorist subjunctive (see for example Mayrhofer or LIV). Exarchus (talk) 19:50, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
Sanskrit. — SURJECTION / T / C / L / 07:54, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- The argument in favor of keeping this would be that Monier-Williams (at 'śiṣ') gives "in later lang. pr. p. śeṣat" and Whitney's Roots mentions this too. Exarchus (talk) 09:22, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
Indonesian. — This unsigned comment was added by Rex Aurorum (talk • contribs) at 00:22, 14 December 2024 (UTC).
Many entries by User:Minhandsomely
[edit]Vietnamese. User has limited command of English and is highly creative with etymologies, also seems to be quite oblivious about our policies.
Reason: “Verific[a]tion for both the entry and the etymology. What are some attestations of this compound nha con? Google is clogged up by unrelated nhà con and the particle use of nha + con. What about this particular noun nha that apparently means "child"?” (Entry was moved from nha con after creation.) MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 03:21, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
Couldn’t find anything in Google. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 03:34, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
One month and not one cite. RfV deleted. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 03:32, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
Rfv-sense: terracottas and pebbles. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 01:53, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
One month and not one cite. RfV deleted. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 03:32, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
Rfv-sense: painstaking; laborious. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 01:57, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
One month and not one cite. RfV deleted. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 03:32, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
“Thiên nhãn thông” seems to be a thing, but is this? MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 02:02, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
One month and not one cite. RfV deleted. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 03:32, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
With some quotes maybe we could take a stab at the the meaning of “one's descendant of the importance”. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 01:56, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
One month and not one cite (or even clarification of the definition). RfV deleted. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 03:32, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
- There should be some quotes containing the sense, I will try to find them and reinstate the page. HungKhanh0106 (talk) 11:48, 13 April 2025 (UTC)
- I actually found out that "cánh tay trái" was created in relation to "cánh tay phải" (e.g. to refer to two right-hand mans of one person[157]), so I will create cánh tay phải ("right-hand man") instead. HungKhanh0106 (talk) 11:55, 13 April 2025 (UTC)
Vietnamese. Rfv-sense: (of certain kinds of rain) heavy. @Minhandsomely, you have one month to find quotes in accordance with our criteria for inclusion; failing this, these entries will be deleted. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 02:21, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
RfV deleted. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 03:24, 3 February 2025 (UTC)
Definition doesn’t make any sense. Correct sense would be to link up, which is SoP. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 02:28, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
RfV to be deleted. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 03:24, 3 February 2025 (UTC)
Re-opened thanks to (finally) some quotes. The meaning, however, seems to have nothing whatsoever to do with mind-mapping, but it just means to link things up. I’m not yet convinced this is actually idiomatic. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 02:19, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
- Since xâu hasn't had the "link" meaning yet, I think it's not SoP for now. Duchuyfootball (talk) 04:40, 23 March 2025 (UTC)
Icelandic. This is an incorrect entry added by an IP in August. This is not the Icelandic definition but the Finnish one. This term is not listed in dictionaries. According to this corpus search it may be a nonce word from 1962 for the Maya civilization but there are no cites available, and the standard Icelandic term for that is "Majar" (plural masculine). 130.208.182.103 13:29, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
Old English: As far as I can tell this verb isn't actually attested. The page has a reference to the Bosworth-Toller dictionary, but no such entry exists. There is the term onġēanhworfennes, which could theoretically be derived from the past participle of this verb, but there's no reason it couldn't be from onġean- + hworfen + -nes. In other words, as far as I can tell, there is no reason to believe this verb actually existed. Vergencescattered (talk) 05:53, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- There is an Old English aġēnhwyrfan which is a weak verb; and a Old English aġēnġehweorfan (“to turn back, return”). I think it is plausible that *onġēanhweorfan could have existed, and that onġēanhworfennes is a derived term. Leasnam (talk) 02:33, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- That makes sense, but it should still be in the reconstruction namespace. Same with sinhweorfan, which AFAICT is only attested in the participle form sinhweorfende. Vergencescattered (talk) 18:52, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
Sanskrit. Monier-Williams (page 165) already mentions: "the meaning ‘to be powerful’ seems to be given by native lexicographers merely for the etymology of the word indra", so this supposed root is very dubious. Exarchus (talk) 16:29, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
Icelandic. Created by User:BiT, whose overall record with Icelandic is not good. Claimed to be a rare variant of obsolete ballur, which does not inspire confidence. ballur is in BÍN, but baldur is not, and although there are a few hits of baldur in MÍM ([158]), they mostly look to be versions of the name Baldur written without capitalization. Benwing2 (talk) 06:10, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- All of BiT's odder entries were clearly created from a headword list from the Dictionary of Icelandic. These entries are correct, but are quite often missing senses and many would need to be marked as obsolete / poetic. The Dictionary of Icelandic lists baldur as an archaic variant of ballur, as does the Etymological Dictionary of Icelandic. Here is one 18th century cite from a poem [159], page 353: "Taktu þitt í tíma ráð, tæmdu holdið balda". 130.208.182.103 07:10, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks, I'll add it back. Benwing2 (talk) 07:22, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- On a different matter, expressions like góður með sig "cocky", can they be put into the comparative or superlative? I find a few examples of "betri með sig" in MÍM but none of "bestur með sig". Similar question about búinn á því "exhausted". Benwing2 (talk) 07:38, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- For "góður með sig", the comparative is acceptable but the superlative is not. "Búinn" is not comparable, so "búinn á því" would require "meira búinn á því" for a comparative, which is acceptable, but "more/most" comparatives are never shown in Icelandic dictionaries. 130.208.182.103 07:48, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks! Benwing2 (talk) 07:56, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Is there a general principle here? illa séður (“unwelcome, frowned upon”) is based on séður (“clever, cunning”), which is comparable per BÍN. There are no examples of "illa séðari" or "illa séðara" in BÍN but only 125 of "illa séður" so this could be an accidental omission. Benwing2 (talk) 08:20, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks! Benwing2 (talk) 07:56, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- For "góður með sig", the comparative is acceptable but the superlative is not. "Búinn" is not comparable, so "búinn á því" would require "meira búinn á því" for a comparative, which is acceptable, but "more/most" comparatives are never shown in Icelandic dictionaries. 130.208.182.103 07:48, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- On a different matter, expressions like góður með sig "cocky", can they be put into the comparative or superlative? I find a few examples of "betri með sig" in MÍM but none of "bestur með sig". Similar question about búinn á því "exhausted". Benwing2 (talk) 07:38, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks, I'll add it back. Benwing2 (talk) 07:22, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
Icelandic. Another User:BiT creation. Two hits in MÍM but they are both mentions, not usages. Benwing2 (talk) 05:31, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
Icelandic. Rfv-sense: adjective meaning "exceptionally dumb". Added by User:Wikiwriter1970, who has exactly one contribution (this one). Benwing2 (talk) 06:40, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
Icelandic. Another User:BiT creation. Ritmálssafn mentions one possible source [160] but there are no Google hits I can find and it's not anywhere else. Need citations. Benwing2 (talk) 06:59, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
Sanskrit & Pali, created by same IP user. I have no idea where this comes from. Exarchus (talk) 10:26, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
Hindi. Rfv-sense: Noun. Any usages outside dictionary? Added by a known problematic user. Svārtava (tɕ) 04:18, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
Icelandic. Created by User:Hvergi. Per the entry itself, it's a "nonce word" only used once. By definition this fails WT:CFI unless someone can find two other citations. Benwing2 (talk) 00:22, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
- Most of the following are learned references to Jónas Hallgrímsson but they are usable citations nonetheless: Use in another 18th or 19th century poem: [161]. Use in 20th century poems: [162][163][164]. Use in prose: [165]. Entire title of the poem used as a learned reference to insult: [166]. Minor discussions of the use of the term in Jónas's poem: [167][168]. --130.208.182.103 09:08, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
January 2025
[edit]Old High German. I cannot find this, as metod or mezzot Leasnam (talk) 02:12, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
Rfv-etym (Indonesian): Etymology must be traced and corroborated by evidence (academic papers, gradual sound changes/loanwords recorded through primary sources, etc.) to establish proof that connects the corresponding etymon(s) to the word prasmanan.
Otherwise, the etymology as currently stands (i.e., sourced from Betawi, and in turn Dutch) remains speculative at best. Myrrhabeaugh (talk) 23:03, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Myrrhabeaugh: LWIM lists both prasman and prasmanan as derived from Dutch Fransman without specifying an intermediary, perhaps simply because it considers Betawi as a dialect of Indonesian/Malay. It should be noted, however, that in an earlier publication (1981, translated into Indonesian 1991) LWIM editor C.D. Grijns explicitly cited Kähler's (1966) Betawi glossary as his source for Prasman, and noted its Dutch origin. Chaer's (1978/2009) Betawi dictionary also lists perasmanan as an entry (he often normalizes entries with consonant clusters by inserting an epenthetic schwa, hence perasmanan instead of prasmanan).
- Prasman is attested in many Malay works by Batavia-based authors:
- 1815 Anonymous. Syair perang Inggeris di Betawi [The poem of English war in Batavia]. (no specific quotations, used multiple times)
- 1896 Njonja Johanna. Boekoe masakan baroe menoendjoekken bagimana bikinnja segala roepa makanan dan kwé-kwé jang enak tjara Blanda, Tjina, Djawa, Prasman dan laenlaen sebaginja menoeroet recept jang soedah terkoempoel [A new cookbook showing how to make assorted delicious meals and kue a la Dutch, Chinese, French and other cuisines according to the recipes that have been compiled].
- 1897 Lie Kim Hok, Hikajat Khonghoetjoe [The life story of Confucius]:
- Toewan de Lanessan, saorang Prasman jang kenal baik adat-lembaga bangsa Anam dan Tjina, ada mengarang satoe kitab ...
- Mr. de Lanessan, a Frenchman who is well acquainted with the customs and institutions of Annam (Vietnam) and China, wrote a book ...
- Toewan de Lanessan, saorang Prasman jang kenal baik adat-lembaga bangsa Anam dan Tjina, ada mengarang satoe kitab ...
- 1914 April 18, Que, "Kawanan Penipoe jang Amat Pinter", Penghiboer, no. 42:
- Itu politie resia yang bengis jadi ilang bengisnya dan sekarang ia bicara dalem bahasa Prasman,
- That fierce secret police officer soften his voice and is now talking in French,
- Itu politie resia yang bengis jadi ilang bengisnya dan sekarang ia bicara dalem bahasa Prasman,
- Note that Prasman can also be found in Javanese and Sundanese texts contemporaneous to the above examples. Still, given its common use in Batavian works, it seems most plausible that Betawi was the immediate donor before it entered wider Malay/Indonesian usage.
- As for the semantic shift from "French style" > "buffet", cf. the synonymous dialectal term perancisan, which is much more etymologically transparent (e.g. Perancis + -an) to modern Indonesian speakers. Swarabakti (talk) 18:18, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
Indonesian – Validation is necessary for the definition of rapat besar as clearly indicating its usage as meaning congress — provide quotations and/or citations to substantiate its existence.
Currently, there exists no official documentation of this term. KBBI (as of current) does not contain an entry on the term "rapat besar," let alone defining it as an equivalent for kongres.
Any signs towards its synonymity is only indicated by KBBI's entry, and the Office of the West Sumatran Languages under the Indonesian Ministry of Education (of which the latter's usage simply cites the former).
However, I am quite skeptical of this definition being synonymous to kongres (congress).
It is unclear whether sources listed above suggest whether the compound word rapat besar (in itself means large assembly) exists as a bahuvrihi (and is thus synonymous to kongres), or whether its meaning is merely endocentric in nature (i.e., if it literally just means big assembly).
I have indeed noticed the word being used a number of times — so the term is definitely attested, despite being outside of KBBI.
With regards to the word meaning congress, however, I am unsure. Attested use has thus far been found within university/student organisational contexts (organisations; e.g., [1], [2], or [3]) — though not limited to them (see also here, though it probably refers literally to a big assembly).
Congress (and its translation kongres) carries a more formal undertone, rather just simply being a synonym of meeting (which would be more generally synonymous to pertemuan or ketemuan in nuance) — referring more to a meeting of experts and/or officials within professional fields (refer to the Wikipedia page for a more nuanced explanation).
Therefore, I think a more appropriate for rapat besar would've been something like general assembly...?
Hopefully somebody may validate this, if it so happens be the case. Myrrhabeaugh (talk) 00:22, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
- As cited usage examples have been added, is it possible to have the sources verifiable (through DOI, ISBN, Hyperlinks, etc.)? @Rex Aurorum Myrrhabeaugh (talk) 03:49, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
Russian. Rfv-sense: "(law) to sue (for)". Was commented out of process. — SURJECTION / T / C / L / 16:12, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
Swahili. All the uses I can find either refer to the Shifta war, or to people with the name Shifta. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 03:08, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- I haven't done any original research but the word is listed in several Swahili dictionaries I use, including bab.la, English-Swahili by Fidèle Mpiranya and Learn Good Swahili by Zahir K. Dhalla. tbm (talk) 01:22, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
- Different dictionaries have different criteria for inclusion. Shifta is obviously in use in Swahili as part of “vita vya Shifta”, and it obviously does mean bandit in Amharic. The question for inclusion in Wiktionary, however, is whether it is ever used in Swahili to mean “bandit” outside of the phrase “vita vya Shifta”. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 01:46, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
Swahili. Is in Tuki, but can’t find any other trace of it. And in Tuki they seem to claim that the plural is formed by replacing the m- prefix with mi-, which must be wrong. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 07:16, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
- It would be best if a native speaker would comment but bab.la shows tarwanda as an alternative form of mtalawanda (which is in mi class). Unfortunately, I can't remember where I saw the word when I added it. tbm (talk) 01:32, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
Swahili. According to what I find online, this is just the plural of kinyuzi, which is the diminutive of uzi (“thread”). Can’t find anything relating this to pubic hair besides the Swahili Wiktionary. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 08:28, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
Ukrainian. Rationale was "There is no such abbreviation in the Ukrainian language. This is an erroneous tracing from Russian. Ukrainian "довбойоб", and not "долб-"". Ultimateria (talk) 18:57, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
Old Church Slavonic. Can't see much out there for this. Theknightwho (talk) 23:48, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
Translingual sense 3. 🍒 is more common. 67.209.129.4 04:05, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
Manipuri. Rfv-sense: Created by suspicious user, apparently means something else. Exarchus 08:54, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
Polish. Can't actually find good cites for this. Vininn126 (talk) 21:27, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
Lower Sorbian.
ř isn't even part of the Lower Sorbian alphabet. Vininn126 (talk) 12:47, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
Tagalog. The entry for suglamuman, a misspelling, failed RFV. However in that discussion it was commented that the misspelling is more common than this form. See Talk:suglamuman. Ultimateria (talk) 21:35, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
Bôn sê vích
[edit]While I acknowledge that hyphenless transliteration of foreign multisyllabic words, e.g. совет (sovet) > soviet > Xô viết & Xô-viết & Xôviết (instances of attestation: [169], [170], [171], [172], etc.). This hyphenless form Bôn sê vích is very rarely attested, e.g. in the website phongnhaexplorer.com (a few times: [173], [174], [175], yet Bôn-sê-vích is also used there), in a 2018 VOVarticle as the nickname of the author's father, not as the name of revolutionaries or their party. Erminwin (talk) 21:56, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
- Vietnamese entry Bôn sê vích meets attestation criterion (2) as proven by these occurrences:
- Hạ Hòa An (2018), ““Chuyến tàu vét” trước khi nghỉ hưu và sự thanh thản tuổi già [The “Last Train” Before Retirement and Peace of Mind in Old Age]”, in Báo Điện Tử Đài Tiếng Nói Việt Nam [Voice of Vietnam Online Newspaper] (in Vietnamese): “Những năm đầu thập niên 80, ngày tôi còn bé tí, mỗi lần lên cơ quan Ba tôi chơi, nghe các cô chú ở cơ quan gọi ông là “Bôn sê vích”, tôi không hiểu gì và chỉ nghĩ, những người làm Trưởng tàu như Ba tôi đều được gọi như thế. ― In the early 80s, when I was little, every time I came to hang out at my Father's workplace, I heard the uncles and aunties there call him “Bolshevik”; I didn't understand and simply thought that train captains like my Father were all called thus.”
- Nam Hồng (2018), “Bố chồng tôi [My Father-In-Law]”, in Báo điện tử của tình Hải Dương [Hải Dương Province's One Line Newspaper] (in Vietnamese): “Mang biệt hiệu “Bôn sê vích” nhưng ông nói thì ai cũng nghe và khen “có lý, có tình”. ― Bearing the nickname “Bolshevik” yet whatever he said everyone heeded and praised as “rational and empathetic”.”
- “Để khôi phục kinh tế sau chiến tranh, tháng 3-1921 Lê nin và Đảng Bôn sê vích đã [To salvage the economy after the war, in March 2021 Lenin and the Bolshevik party]”, in khoahoc.vietjack.com (in Vietnamese), 14 August 2021
- “Vì sao tháng 3/1921 Lê nin và Đảng Bôn sê vích quyết định thực hiện Chính sách kinh tế mới? [Why, in March 1921, did Lenin and the Bolshevik Party Decide to Implement the New Economic Policy?]”, in khoahoc.vietjack.com (in Vietnamese), 25 July 2022
- And thus is worth including.
- To me at least, this issue is resolved. Anyone else? @MuDavid, @ChemPro, @PhanAnh123, @Billcipher123, @HungKhanh0106, @Duchuyfootball, etc.
Hindi and Nepali. The page gives it as "hundred billion; 1011", but McGregor gives "ten thousand millions" (1010). Is it possible that the meaning has changed? Exarchus (talk) 23:02, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
Old Prussian. All added by @Aklbmd164 without any sources. Some might be (and some almost definitely are) 'revived Prussian', which is not allowed on en.wikt. — SURJECTION / T / C / L / 22:31, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
- RFV-deleted — SURJECTION / T / C / L / 06:37, 8 July 2025 (UTC)
Silesian. The noun niyprzileżytość is coined separately, otherwise completely unattested. Vininn126 (talk) 21:18, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
Swahili. Rfv-sense: quiver (arrow container), a Tbot entry. All that I find online refers to the Muslim zakat, and the plural mazaka seems unattested. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 02:22, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
Arabic. “a Biblical region located in modern Syria.” — Fenakhay (حيطي · مساهماتي) 15:26, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
- Should be easy enough to verify, since it's mentioned in the Old Testament, which has been translated into Arabic. I wonder, though, why the etymology says it's a learned borrowing from an unattested Aramaic word that comes from the Hebrew word, rather than simply saying it's a learned borrowing from the Hebrew word. —Mahāgaja · talk 15:47, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
Arabic. — Fenakhay (حيطي · مساهماتي) 15:29, 22 January 2025 (UTC)
Udmurt - Nail123Real (talk) 21:44, 27 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Nail123Real This page has never been created. What are you referring to? Ultimateria (talk) 19:10, 15 April 2025 (UTC)
- honey in udmurt Nail123Real (talk) 11:46, 16 April 2025 (UTC)
Mongolian "construction". Entered by User:Theknightwho. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 04:34, 30 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Atitarev This seems to be fairly common. It only refers to the construction industry. Theknightwho (talk) 06:57, 30 January 2025 (UTC)
- I think it's common in Russian, too, but only as a marked anglicism. Is this also the case in Mongolian? And I think it's a good idea to add a quote to the entry. Thadh (talk) 09:55, 30 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Theknightwho, @Thadh, all those cases in Mongolian, Russian, etc. are used in construction company titles. Not really used in the sense of “construction”. Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 12:37, 30 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Atitarev: For Russian, definitely not: констракшна has a fairly high number of hits as well. Not sure it's verifiable though, it's mostly very marked, almost like codeswitching. Don't know about Mongolian, but considering the Ukrainian and Belarusian hits, I'm guessing the same is true there. Thadh (talk) 17:23, 30 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Theknightwho, @Thadh, all those cases in Mongolian, Russian, etc. are used in construction company titles. Not really used in the sense of “construction”. Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 12:37, 30 January 2025 (UTC)
- I think it's common in Russian, too, but only as a marked anglicism. Is this also the case in Mongolian? And I think it's a good idea to add a quote to the entry. Thadh (talk) 09:55, 30 January 2025 (UTC)
Urdu. Tagged but not listed. A synonym recently failed verification. Thadh (talk) 17:36, 30 January 2025 (UTC)
Polish.
Seems to have some of a presence online but not sure there are any in materials that meet our criteria. Vininn126 (talk) 21:50, 30 January 2025 (UTC)
- Mostly as "Naziści z Nazistowa", in ironical way, quite popular on social media Bildete (talk) 22:04, 30 January 2025 (UTC)
- @Bildete Please see WT:CFI when it comes to actually providing quotations. Vininn126 (talk) 22:06, 30 January 2025 (UTC)
- 2013 - https://dorzeczy.pl/opinie/1200/parchy-i-szwaby.html Bildete (talk) 21:35, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
- This could potentially be one source. We need three. Vininn126 (talk) 21:41, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
- Just Google Nazistowo/z Nazistowa or go on x or fb, but just in case already from 2005 https://forum.gazeta.pl/forum/w,13,19875846,19875846,To_na_roboty_do_Hitlerowa_Nazistowa_.html or another 2014 https://wykop.pl/link/2166544/niemieckie-obozy-nie-polskie Bildete (talk) 09:57, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- Again, Internet quotations, as per CFI (have you read that?) need to go through approval. Vininn126 (talk) 09:59, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- Just Google Nazistowo/z Nazistowa or go on x or fb, but just in case already from 2005 https://forum.gazeta.pl/forum/w,13,19875846,19875846,To_na_roboty_do_Hitlerowa_Nazistowa_.html or another 2014 https://wykop.pl/link/2166544/niemieckie-obozy-nie-polskie Bildete (talk) 09:57, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
- This could potentially be one source. We need three. Vininn126 (talk) 21:41, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
- 2013 - https://dorzeczy.pl/opinie/1200/parchy-i-szwaby.html Bildete (talk) 21:35, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Bildete Please see WT:CFI when it comes to actually providing quotations. Vininn126 (talk) 22:06, 30 January 2025 (UTC)
Polish. Rfv-sense: tragus. Can't seem to find this usage - could be obsolete, in which case it would need a label. Vininn126 (talk) 22:03, 30 January 2025 (UTC)
Komi-Permyak. Tagged but not listed. Илья А. Латушкин (talk) 09:55, 31 January 2025 (UTC)
- RFV-failed Илья А. Латушкин (talk) 13:30, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
Komi-Permyak. Tagged but not listed. Илья А. Латушкин (talk) 09:57, 31 January 2025 (UTC)
- RFV-failed Илья А. Латушкин (talk) 13:32, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
Komi-Permyak. Tagged but not listed. Илья А. Латушкин (talk) 09:58, 31 January 2025 (UTC)
- RFV-failed Илья А. Латушкин (talk) 13:40, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
Komi-Permyak. Tagged but not listed. Илья А. Латушкин (talk) 09:59, 31 January 2025 (UTC)
- RFV-failed Илья А. Латушкин (talk) 13:42, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
Komi-Permyak. Tagged but not listed. Илья А. Латушкин (talk) 09:59, 31 January 2025 (UTC)
- RFV-failed Илья А. Латушкин (talk) 13:43, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
Komi-Permyak. Tagged but not listed. Илья А. Латушкин (talk) 10:00, 31 January 2025 (UTC)
- RFV-failed Илья А. Латушкин (talk) 13:45, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
Komi-Permyak. Tagged but not listed. Илья А. Латушкин (talk) 10:01, 31 January 2025 (UTC)
- RFV-failed Илья А. Латушкин (talk) 13:47, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
Komi-Permyak. Tagged but not listed. Илья А. Латушкин (talk) 10:01, 31 January 2025 (UTC)
- RFV-failed Илья А. Латушкин (talk) 13:49, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
Komi-Permyak. Tagged but not listed. Илья А. Латушкин (talk) 10:03, 31 January 2025 (UTC)
- RFV-failed Илья А. Латушкин (talk) 13:52, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
Komi-Permyak. Tagged but not listed. Илья А. Латушкин (talk) 10:04, 31 January 2025 (UTC)
- RFV-failed Илья А. Латушкин (talk) 13:54, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
Komi-Permyak. Tagged but not listed. Илья А. Латушкин (talk) 10:04, 31 January 2025 (UTC)
- RFV-failed Илья А. Латушкин (talk) 13:56, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
Komi-Permyak. Tagged but not listed. Илья А. Латушкин (talk) 10:05, 31 January 2025 (UTC)
- RFV-failed Илья А. Латушкин (talk) 13:58, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
Komi-Permyak. Tagged but not listed. Илья А. Латушкин (talk) 10:06, 31 January 2025 (UTC)
- RFV-failed Илья А. Латушкин (talk) 14:00, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
Komi-Permyak. Tagged but not listed. Илья А. Латушкин (talk) 10:06, 31 January 2025 (UTC)
- RFV-failed Илья А. Латушкин (talk) 14:02, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
February 2025
[edit]@PhanAnh123 I know this term firstly not through dictionaries, but through my relatives who are of Nghe An/Ha Tinh descent. I think it should be listed as "dialectal" because I don't really know where exactly is it used. From my relative's info, I know that it is from the North and it's "tiếng phổ thông" (standard language), but I'm a bit confused about the contradictory definitions in https://chunom.net/Tu-Dien.html, so I decided to just leave its {{lb}} as "now dialectal". HungKhanh0106 (talk) 07:31, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
(Moved from RfD) It does not follow Irish orthography and I don’t see any sources online besides a very unreliable baby name website. The official (téarma.ie) Irish form of Emmanuel is Imeánúéil. Saighneánach (talk) 14:29, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
- RFV-failed. —Granger (talk · contribs) 12:26, 22 September 2025 (UTC)
German. — SURJECTION / T / C / L / 13:15, 3 February 2025 (UTC)
- Don't know if this counts as attestation: https://www.korrekturen.de/worttrennung/de/achttausendachthundertachtundachtzig/, https://alemao.a77.com.br/numeros/numeros-em-alemao-do-8851-ao-8900.php Stríðsdrengur (talk) 23:36, 23 February 2025 (UTC)
- RFV-failed. —Granger (talk · contribs) 12:25, 22 September 2025 (UTC)
Karelian. Thadh (talk) 10:55, 4 February 2025 (UTC)
- RFV-failed. —Granger (talk · contribs) 12:22, 22 September 2025 (UTC)
Karelian. Thadh (talk) 10:56, 4 February 2025 (UTC)
- RFV-failed. —Granger (talk · contribs) 12:21, 22 September 2025 (UTC)
Old Tupi. Supposedly attested in îu'iperereka (“tree frog”), but the original source doesn't discuss it. Navarro says it's a coumpound of îu'i + pererek and apparently coined a meaning for the second term? Because I couldn't find this verb pererek anywhere else. I've discussed it with @RodRabelo7 already, who found a perereg in Classical Guarani, but wanted to formalize it. Trooper57 (talk) 03:53, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
- RFV-failed Trooper57 (talk) 17:07, 26 June 2025 (UTC)
- @Trooper57: Deleted. Please update the etymology at îu'iperereka. Also, what about perereka? Ultimateria (talk) 00:54, 29 June 2025 (UTC)
- @Ultimateria: thanks. I was thinking of moving perereka to Reconstruction and treat it as a clipping of îu'iperereka, seeing the descendants in both Portuguese and Nheengatu, but maybe we should just delete it too. @RodRabelo7, Polomo47 thoughts? Trooper57 (talk) 02:10, 29 June 2025 (UTC)
- I’m not sure I understand the context. Is Navarro wrong? Is îu'iperereka not derived from perereka? Polomo47 (talk) 02:46, 29 June 2025 (UTC)
- No, pererek is not attested anywhere else, either alone or in another compound, and there's nothing in the primary source that says it could mean "jumper" or "to jump"—Navarro made the senses up, probably based on Sampaio's. I've updated the etymology in îu'iperereka. Trooper57 (talk) 03:04, 29 June 2025 (UTC)
- Particularly support it, would support even creating *pererek based on the Guaraní cognate perere. RodRabelo7 (talk) 04:23, 29 June 2025 (UTC)
- What would the meaning of *pererek be then? The Guarani term is totally different... Trooper57 (talk) 04:39, 29 June 2025 (UTC)
- I’m not sure I understand the context. Is Navarro wrong? Is îu'iperereka not derived from perereka? Polomo47 (talk) 02:46, 29 June 2025 (UTC)
- @Ultimateria: thanks. I was thinking of moving perereka to Reconstruction and treat it as a clipping of îu'iperereka, seeing the descendants in both Portuguese and Nheengatu, but maybe we should just delete it too. @RodRabelo7, Polomo47 thoughts? Trooper57 (talk) 02:10, 29 June 2025 (UTC)
- @Trooper57: Deleted. Please update the etymology at îu'iperereka. Also, what about perereka? Ultimateria (talk) 00:54, 29 June 2025 (UTC)
Indonesian.
Russian. Added by a problematic user, I'm inclined to speedy fail this. Vininn126 (talk) 07:15, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Speedied. The actual entry is at Нинильчик (Ninilʹčik). —Mahāgaja · talk 07:42, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Hmm... Wikipedia does have an entry for Alaskan Russian which is purportedly written in the Latin alphabet as well as Cyrillic. There's a dictionary at [176]. At a quick glance it appears to be only slightly different from regular Russian, except for the writing system. I don't know whether the community of Russian editors is inclined to add Latin-alphabet entries for this dialect. If so, they should probably be
{{alt sp}}'s rather than full entries, at any rate. —Mahāgaja · talk 07:49, 10 February 2025 (UTC)- Something that should be discussed, perhaps at WT:About Russian, especially before adding such terms blindly. Vininn126 (talk) 07:52, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- Alaskan Russian is rather markedly different from any other variant of Russian, especially in morphology and phonology, as I've gathered from various presentations on the topic. If anything, Alskan Russian should be an L2, not integrated into Russian. Thadh (talk) 22:13, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
Vietnamese verb meaning "to riot; to rampage" (negative connotions) with no attestation. I do a quick search and seem like it is a shortened version of đi bão, which means "to storm the street to celebrate" (does not have a negative connotation). Duchuyfootball (talk) 14:11, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
- That’s exactly what the entry used to say, but an IP (looks like Fumiko Take) insisted on changing it. I think we can just revert to the previous definitions rather than deleting this one and then re-adding the old one. It could be the IP is simply too bad at English to fully understand what “riot” and “rampage” actually mean. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 02:28, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
- IP here. As a bilingual English & Vietnamese speaker "riot" is exactly how I would define it. In English the word doesn't always have a negative connotation (for example, a tourist in Vietnam experiencing a bão could exclaim "that football celebration was such a riot" to say that it was an entertaining event, per definition #3 of riot). Whether it has a positive or negative connotation doesn't matter; in this case "riot" is merely a objective description and any connotations are a matter of context in which the word is being used. Furthermore bão or đi bão has been used in sanctioned Vietnamese media to describe actual instances of tumult and rampage [177][178][179] Please note that I am not making any negative judgments on Vietnam at all in regards to the đi bão culture; sports rioting is an established phenomenon that has taken place all around the world (indeed, there was celebratory rioting that occured in Philadelphia after the Super Bowl last week). Đi bão just happens to be Vietnam's version of that. 73.240.115.64 07:47, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
- “[C]onnotations are a matter of context.” Exactly, and without context (such as in a dictionary gloss), the words “riot” and “rampage” always have connotations of violence. This makes these words completely and utterly unsuitable for a dictionary gloss of bão. The original gloss (“to go to celebrate on the streets with motorbikes racing around the city (at times of national pride)”) is infinitely better. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 07:56, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
- A storm/typhoon/hurricane is inherently violent as well. Frankly that gloss sounds like someone is too proud that their country won the championship and can't acknowledge the fact that violence (however unintentional) has and does tend to occur during these spontaneous celebrations (as per the links if you had read them - also it would be incredibly rude for me to say that you're "simply too bad at Vietnamese" just because you're at a vi-3 level). 73.240.115.64 08:18, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
- Violence is not necessary for something to be a bão in the meaning of what happens after a sports victory; violence is necessary for something to be a riot in the meaning the word is understood without context. Therefore “riot” cannot be a gloss for bão. My Vietnamese is more than good enough to read your links, and from the headlines it is obvious that the articles are about events that happened during a bão. The word bão is used to describe the context of the tumult and rampage, not to describe the actual tumult and rampage. Would it be rude of me to say that you’re “simply too bad at creating accurate glosses”? Fumiko Take certainly was. (And she often used language similar to your “T lạy m éo liên quan gì với chính trị đâu ta.” She even got blocked because of it. Are you Fumiko Take?) MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 09:02, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
- Don't know who that person is but at least đi bão doesn't define it as a "riot" anymore. Whatever, if that's too strong of a word for your tastes then stick with "ruckus" and "commotion" then. Giỏi lắm, thôi mệt rồi cậu muốn làm gì cứ việc làm đi. 73.240.115.64 09:29, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
- Violence is not necessary for something to be a bão in the meaning of what happens after a sports victory; violence is necessary for something to be a riot in the meaning the word is understood without context. Therefore “riot” cannot be a gloss for bão. My Vietnamese is more than good enough to read your links, and from the headlines it is obvious that the articles are about events that happened during a bão. The word bão is used to describe the context of the tumult and rampage, not to describe the actual tumult and rampage. Would it be rude of me to say that you’re “simply too bad at creating accurate glosses”? Fumiko Take certainly was. (And she often used language similar to your “T lạy m éo liên quan gì với chính trị đâu ta.” She even got blocked because of it. Are you Fumiko Take?) MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 09:02, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
- A storm/typhoon/hurricane is inherently violent as well. Frankly that gloss sounds like someone is too proud that their country won the championship and can't acknowledge the fact that violence (however unintentional) has and does tend to occur during these spontaneous celebrations (as per the links if you had read them - also it would be incredibly rude for me to say that you're "simply too bad at Vietnamese" just because you're at a vi-3 level). 73.240.115.64 08:18, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
- “[C]onnotations are a matter of context.” Exactly, and without context (such as in a dictionary gloss), the words “riot” and “rampage” always have connotations of violence. This makes these words completely and utterly unsuitable for a dictionary gloss of bão. The original gloss (“to go to celebrate on the streets with motorbikes racing around the city (at times of national pride)”) is infinitely better. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 07:56, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
- IP here. As a bilingual English & Vietnamese speaker "riot" is exactly how I would define it. In English the word doesn't always have a negative connotation (for example, a tourist in Vietnam experiencing a bão could exclaim "that football celebration was such a riot" to say that it was an entertaining event, per definition #3 of riot). Whether it has a positive or negative connotation doesn't matter; in this case "riot" is merely a objective description and any connotations are a matter of context in which the word is being used. Furthermore bão or đi bão has been used in sanctioned Vietnamese media to describe actual instances of tumult and rampage [177][178][179] Please note that I am not making any negative judgments on Vietnam at all in regards to the đi bão culture; sports rioting is an established phenomenon that has taken place all around the world (indeed, there was celebratory rioting that occured in Philadelphia after the Super Bowl last week). Đi bão just happens to be Vietnam's version of that. 73.240.115.64 07:47, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
Old Tupi. Navarro doesn't cite any source and I could only find the form Ananas in Historia Naturalis, but Marcgrave explicitly calls it "Lusitanis".[180] Pinging the only other Old Tupi editor left alive @RodRabelo7. Trooper57 (talk) 13:14, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
- Trooper57, perhaps move to *ananá, based on Nheengatu ananá, Guaraní anana, and of course Portuguese ananá / ananás? But I would expect *nanã and *ananã... @Bageense pinging. RodRabelo7 (talk) 21:50, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
Tagalog. Neologism, probably misdefined too. See long rationale on page. Ultimateria (talk) 01:20, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- RFV-failed. —Granger (talk · contribs) 12:16, 22 September 2025 (UTC)
Czech. Rationale was "standardized name is eponym or eponymos in Czech". Ultimateria (talk) 02:05, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
- RFV-failed. —Granger (talk · contribs) 12:17, 22 September 2025 (UTC)
Fula. I can find Maasina Fulfulde jukkude (“to pierce, to puncture, to prick”) here: https://www.webonary.work/pular/gdac082f4-a795-4e69-ac9d-4c5cbbd0b550/ --Appolodorus1 (talk) 14:13, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
Old Church Slavonic.
I don't think it's a coincidence that these are the only OCS lemmas with this ending.
Need to be moved to the correct spellings and cleaned up (they had no WT formatting) if not deleted. Chuck Entz (talk) 15:54, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
- To judge from the image at серафими многоꙮчитїи, this is the spelling found in the manuscript. The ending is that of the long masculine plural, which would be normalized to -ии; this adjective apparently occurs only in this phrase, where the adjective agrees with masculine plural серафими (serafimi). —Mahāgaja · talk 20:00, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
- The page at Commons dates it as 15th century. We treat that period as Church Slavonic, with the language code "zls-chs". There are Church Slavonic translations at many-eyed that sort of match. Chuck Entz (talk) 21:27, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
Serbo-Croatian. Google search results in lots of dative/locative singular of kengur/кенгур but hardly any evidence (=possible typos) of this form existing in nominative singular. Jouluntähti (talk) 20:42, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
Guaraní.
A term that does not even follow the most common Guaraní orthography. It is not listed in Krivoshein's dictionary, only mainumby is. It was added to Vikipetã in this edit by @Hugo.arg. The entry's creator, @DPUH, allegedly does not know Guaraní, or if they do, they omitted this information from their user page. Here, mainumby is used in Guaraní and mainumbí in Spanish. Pinging @Trooper57. RodRabelo7 (talk) 19:22, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- Delete. Trooper57 (talk) 19:29, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- Could be a redirect to mainumby - it's Spanish version of Guarani word. It may be used in Paraguayan Spanish language. Hugo.arg (talk) 20:21, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Hugo.arg, I am not familiar with Spanish. If it is a term used in Paraguayan Spanish, it might be possible to convert it into a Spanish entry with the label "Paraguay" (Category:Paraguayan Spanish). But can you provide some usage examples? Is it listed in dictionaries (not necessary, but it would help)? RodRabelo7 (talk) 21:04, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
- It is used for hummingbird in Paraguay and Northern Argentina (see, for example, La Leyenda Del Mainumbí, Picaflor verde, El Mainumbí y el Cururú (El picaflor y el sapo), etc. Hugo.arg (talk) 14:54, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- I've added a Spanish section to the page. Guess that was the root of the problem: mixing up Guaraní and regional Spanish. Trooper57 (talk) 16:01, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- It is used for hummingbird in Paraguay and Northern Argentina (see, for example, La Leyenda Del Mainumbí, Picaflor verde, El Mainumbí y el Cururú (El picaflor y el sapo), etc. Hugo.arg (talk) 14:54, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Hugo.arg, I am not familiar with Spanish. If it is a term used in Paraguayan Spanish, it might be possible to convert it into a Spanish entry with the label "Paraguay" (Category:Paraguayan Spanish). But can you provide some usage examples? Is it listed in dictionaries (not necessary, but it would help)? RodRabelo7 (talk) 21:04, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
Russian. Not that much web hits but it apparently does exist in that sense (all i can find is one Mail.Ru Answers question), just needs some more investigation to ensure that it does exist in that sense. 67.209.129.191 22:17, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
Swahili. Rfv-sense: adjective form of -wili. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 03:14, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
ᯅ
[edit]Translingual: ᯅ (U+1BC5 BATAK LETTER BA). Added yesterday by 67.209.129.191 to 🥽 as a synonym of the sense “The closest emoji representation of a virtual reality or augmented reality headset.” and to ✨ under “See also” with the gloss “Apple Vision Pro”. J3133 (talk) 06:25, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
Tagalog. Tagged but not listed by User:Ysrael214. Ultimateria (talk) 02:18, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
- RFV-failed. —Granger (talk · contribs) 12:14, 22 September 2025 (UTC)
Upper Sorbian. Rationale was "there are no native words with f". Ultimateria (talk) 00:42, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
Thai.
This term does not exist. It is not used or found used anywhere. A Google search of this term returned nothing (except this Wiktionary entry). Voice actors are called นักพากย์ in Thai, as seen in w:th:นักพากย์.
-- Lucubratist (talk) 11:08, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
- RFV-failed. —Granger (talk · contribs) 12:13, 22 September 2025 (UTC)
someone added an rfv tag to Ariarith without starting a discussion here so it can be resolved, the user writes: "source states: "The adaption of Vandalic forms to the Latin linguistic environment .. for example the typical loss o h-" - sounds like the Latin to Romance development of lossing initial h, hinting that these names are Latin."
This seems to be a specious argument Latin sound changes have spread to Swedish and are not indicative of attribution to any language, and not directly related to attestation. Loss and overcorrective addition of intial and medial h is a fairly common occurrence in ancient and medieval Germanic names. It can make identifying the original elements difficult (in this case it could rather be a variant of Ari-"honor" or Aria- "noble" instead of Hari-"army"), but doesn't change the language from Germanic to Latin. Wikipedia France has a page on the Historic figure, referring to a further English reference work https://archive.org/details/plre-01-260-395/PLRE03A_527-641/page/114/mode/2up. the ending in -th rather than -d or -dus or -thus, argues against it being a Latin form of the name. Griffon77 (talk) 20:09, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
Vietnamese. An IP RfD’ed 博物館, but I’m quite sure they meant to RfV this one. Their comment: “Never seen this used before, even in French and VNCH times.” MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 09:52, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
- I think it's just a Sino-Vietnamese word. A quick Google search returns only attestations in Hanzi and Kanji translations and quotations (and one normal use case but it seems to aim to be antique.) I'm on the fence here. Duchuyfootball (talk) 16:25, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
Irish. I can't find this term anywhere, and it doesn't even make grammatical sense. (I would expect the Irish for "lint brush" to be scuab líonolla, not that I'm finding evidence for that either.) —Mahāgaja · talk 19:38, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
- RFV failed. —Mahāgaja · talk 06:56, 15 September 2025 (UTC)
Vietnamese. RfV verb sense: to backtrack. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 01:57, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
- I don't think there is a verb that is capitalized like that. cuội as a verb should be added (try "đừng cuội" on Google). Duchuyfootball (talk) 16:42, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
- Delete as per (1) Duchuyfootball's remark. Erminwin (talk) 13:59, 2 July 2025 (UTC)
Vietnamese. Rfv-sense: sacred. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 01:58, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
Vietnamese. Rfv-sense: person who engages in reckless behavior. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 02:02, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
- Don't know if this count. Based on the context, I don't think that "cowboy" was someone who tends cattle in American West). Duchuyfootball (talk) 16:51, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
- I vote to keep it. Still, Mxn wrote it, so they should adduce at least three example quotes. Otherwise, it shall be rewritten in light of @Duchuyfootball's finding. Erminwin (talk) 17:45, 6 July 2025 (UTC)
Vietnamese. Rfv-sense: to counterargue, to refute an idea. Added by @Yang Deming with gloss “to counterargue, to redargue, to refute an idea”. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 02:14, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
- This and especially this. It's hard to pinpoint what people mean when they use this word, as the idea of "debate" is quite alien. So the perceived meaning can range from something like to argue, to refute, to counterargue to critically debate. Duchuyfootball (talk) 17:04, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
Ottoman Turkish. Imo a folk etymologized form of اوش امدی (uş imdi) that I could find no attestations of. Bartanaqa (talk) 15:50, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
Turkish asymmetry
[edit]I don't speak Turkish, but asymmetry#Translations claims that the Turkish word for asymmetry is simetri and I have to confess I'm skeptical. Can someone who knows Turkish confirm whether the word for asymmetry is in fact actually asimetri with an a-? —Mahāgaja · talk 15:51, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
- ur correct its asimetri (see “asimetri”, in Turkish dictionaries, Türk Dil Kurumu) Bartanaqa (talk) 16:00, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks, fixed. —Mahāgaja · talk 15:21, 23 February 2025 (UTC)
- Resolved. —Granger (talk · contribs) 11:44, 22 September 2025 (UTC)
this seems to be a typographical error or a misread. the cited reference makes no mention of this form, only Pleoninga. A google search returns no other reference other than the wiktionary entry, and a search of https://www.digitale-sammlungen.de/ finds no books with this word except a misread by the otherwise excellent OCR engine of OE fleringa (flooring, story, the source apparently being a real estate listing) Griffon77 (talk) 15:59, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Griffon77 Very obviously a typo, so I moved it to the intended spelling. Chuck Entz (talk) 22:06, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
- I see, but the references only mentions Pleoninga, not Pleoinga Griffon77 (talk) 08:59, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
- in fact hte "name" referenced by Schatz is not even a given name, but a village Pliening
- P. Carolo Meichelbeck (1724), Historiæ Frisingensis (in Latin), Tomus Primi, Augustæ Vindel. et Græcii: Sumptibus Philippi, Martini et Joannis Veith, Fratrum, , →OCLC, page 173: “Venientibus venerabilibus Hittone Epiſcopo, & Ellanperto Comite in pago, qui dicitur Pleoninga, & ibi collecta multitudine nobilium hominum venit ibi in præſentia inluſter Vir, in nomine Folcrat ― When the venerable Bishop Hitton and Count Ellanpert came to the village called Pliening, and a multitude of noble men were gathered there, an illustrious man named Folcrat came there in the his presence”
- in fact hte "name" referenced by Schatz is not even a given name, but a village Pliening
- I see, but the references only mentions Pleoninga, not Pleoinga Griffon77 (talk) 08:59, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
the original
https://www.digitale-sammlungen.de/view/bsb00003037?page=444
- Griffon77 (talk) 10:11, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Griffon77: if the evidence and the consensus point to another spelling, it can go there. I just wanted to remove the typo from the deliberations. Chuck Entz (talk) 14:31, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
- The typo is the only issue remaining. the place name is well attested both in the historic documents (the original manuscript has been scanned though not indexed) and the modern municipality references the spelling in its history page, as does wikipedia (without sources unfortunately). can this be closed now (how?), these are building up Griffon77 (talk) 18:55, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
- Update: the page has been moved to Pleoninga. Ultimateria (talk) 18:57, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
rfv added by another user with the reason: “page 28 and § 28 and Wortregister on p. 181 don't contain this word.”
but no request for verification actually created til now. this issue appears to have been already resolved with corrections to the references which do contain the name, but the rfv tag remains Griffon77 (talk) 20:05, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
Histoire general de Languedoc, listed by Forstemann as his source, doesn't seem to have any reference to the name Folderich. All i can find is Folderic in a french translation of Orlando Furioso (although it's actually from the included "Extract of DE L’ORLANDO INNAMORATO" in the original 15th C. Italian Folderico Unfortunately I can really only search books digitized at the BNF. MDZ would be good to check, but it's not working right now. Griffon77 (talk) 02:45, 24 February 2025 (UTC)
- now that MDZ is working again I can find Folderich in 19th C. German translations of Orlando Innamorato, and a couple of books from the early 17th C. some referencing the late 16th. Others are too indecipherable to be valid citations, one is clearly Friderich, and the one in Luther is Fo:derich (Föderich?). Nothing in OHG and the oldest seems to be early modern German. Griffon77 (talk) 10:35, 24 February 2025 (UTC)
German. Given as an "Alternate transliteration of würdigen" in 2004. Ultimateria (talk) 00:55, 25 February 2025 (UTC)
- Alternate transliteration is of course nonsense, it's an alternative spelling, used whenever the character ⟨ü⟩ is unavailable. I'm sure it's possible to find attestations of this spelling in print, especially from the 19th century or earlier (or from computer-written texts when only ASCII characters were available), but I think our treatment of ⟨ae oe ue⟩ vs. ⟨ä ö ü⟩ spellings in German needs to be decided in a general discussion, not on an entry-by-entry basis. —Mahāgaja · talk 07:04, 25 February 2025 (UTC)
{{Mokilese determiners}} gives -ew, -men, -oaw, -pas, -kij as the five Mokilese indefinite singular article suffixes. However, reading chapter four (and especially § 4.1.8) of Sheldon P. Harrison’s 1976 Mokilese reference grammar suggests to me that -ew is just a clitic form of the numeral root e- (“one”) + -w (general numeral classifier), whereas -oaw is likewise just a clitic form of the serial counting numeral oahd (“one”) + -w (general numeral classifier). Perhaps {{Mokilese determiners}} should be edited to refer only to -w, -men, -pas, and -kij, whereas -oaw should be deleted. As for pukkoaw, Harrison glosses it both as “one book” and as “a book”; it would be good to have actual instances of use to look at whereby we might determine meaning. Should pukkoaw have the etymology puk + oahd + -w? 0DF (talk) 17:21, 25 February 2025 (UTC)
RFV-Failed 0DF (talk) 23:31, 26 November 2025 (UTC)
- @0DF Please correct pages at Special:WhatLinksHere/-oaw. — Polomo ⟨ oi! ⟩ · 15:25, 4 December 2025 (UTC)
- @Polomo: Done. 0DF (talk) 09:55, 5 December 2025 (UTC)
Old High German.
the reference provided makes it clear this is not a given name, but a German folk-etymology of palfrey, German Pferd. Schatz gives the development with references to other sources listing pherfrit as a later development. Karl Widman says MHG pherfrit (https://www.digitale-sammlungen.de/en/view/bsb10584582?page=50,&q=pherfrit), Deutsche Lehnwörter in their derivation of German Pferd lists it as an OHG variant (https://www.digitale-sammlungen.de/en/view/bsb11643856?page=92,&q=Pherfrit)
Bengali. — SURJECTION / T / C / L / 11:10, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
Albanian. Only attested in Orel's literature. 3 hits on Google. Chihunglu83 (talk) 15:01, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
Albanian. Slang but unsourced. Chihunglu83 (talk) 15:01, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
- @SairiRM maybe you could kindly help with these Albanian requests? Chihunglu83 (talk) 20:31, 4 March 2025 (UTC)
- While it is slang used pretty extensively especially in certain regions, I can't really seem to find some kind of semi-official use besides my own experience and comments on social media by other people.
- On another note, it also has a secondary meaning 'to enjoy/roll with', similar to English 'to fuck with'. SairiRM (talk) 12:49, 5 March 2025 (UTC)
Old High German. Whole descent tree before the misspelled German listing seems to be imagined - no Mindah, except as a variant of middah mentioned in the 16th C., no basis for reconstructing *Mindak or *Mendaks, which are contrary to the cited reference
Old High German. German and OHG name and roots seem imaginary. no attestations for any of these names. Nargell is Swedish (and so relatively recent), Nargil is Persian, Arabic and Rabbinic, Norgel/Norgell possibly German, but not even referenced here (and could be Sorbian/Pomerainian)
Old High German. germanic names listed not in evidence - some Czech and undetermined language old Slavic words, but no names, and nothing Germanic
Albanian. Source given does not mention anything about the haircut. Chihunglu83 (talk) 19:21, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
March 2025
[edit]Old High German. no apparent attestion of Jundil as a German surname or given name before WWI. references in the 19th C. and earlier specifically call it Lithuanian. more apparently spurious etymologies made up by the user out of thin air — This unsigned comment was added by Griffon77 (talk • contribs) at 07:53, 1 March 2025 (UTC).
Lower Sorbian. Obsolete form of bóžy (“divine”). Theknightwho (talk) 21:42, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
Lower Sorbian. Obsolete form of žywy (“alive”). Theknightwho (talk) 21:44, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
- Both of these spellings are from Zwahr's 1847 Niederlausitz-wendisch–deutsches Handwörterbuch; see [181] (scan at [182]) and [183] (scan at [184]). —Mahāgaja · talk 00:22, 2 March 2025 (UTC)
Old High German. on p.416 of the Wirtembergisches Urkundenbuch (Forsetmann's source) they alledge this is a gloss of Waganasheim "Aginesheim, Egisheim 12. (vgl. Uuaganesheim)", apparently assuming it is V.(for villa)Aganesheim. The other urkundenbuchs covering the 8th. and 9th C. say Vaganesheim as well. https://www.digitale-sammlungen.de/en/view/bsb11212597?page=278&q=Vaganesheim https://www.digitale-sammlungen.de/en/view/bsb10004573?page=514,515&q=Vaganesheim (the same record with a different calculation of the regnal year. Neugart here equates Vaganesheim with Agineshaim) in reference to this the editors of the WU later quote a reference which says "To interpret Uaganesheim as Egisheim is not linguistically permissible; it is probably an abandoned place to be sought near the mentioned villages of Behla and Hausen", however this source, depending on Neugart (who mentions the donation of Agineshaim in 770, but only gives a precis of the original without the name of the village) https://www.digitale-sammlungen.de/en/view/bsb11486285?page=44,45&q=Vaganesheim
Goldast, much before Neugart and the WU however also has Agineshaim in 770
https://www.digitale-sammlungen.de/view/bsb11439844?page=70
I can't find a scan of the original manuscript in this case. the Urkundebuch st Gallen suggests it is codex traditiones 30 no.51, but this doesn't get me anywhere
Slovak. None of the contemporary dictionaries include this word, probably only in Old Slovak/of regional usage. Chihunglu83 (talk) 00:31, 2 March 2025 (UTC)
Hindi. Misspelling of अज़दर, an alternative form of अज़दहा. See अज़्दर at {{R:ur:Rekhta}} and अजदर at {{R:hi:Dasa}}. Kutchkutch (talk) 12:55, 2 March 2025 (UTC)
Albanian. Can pëllas mean a palate? As far as I know it is used as a verb. Chihunglu83 (talk) 13:36, 3 March 2025 (UTC)
Old High German. appears to be a spurious reconstruction. no documentary evidence of this name outside the Americas where it seems to be a variation of Scottish Taggart user also uses the form Daugart in link, again, nothing I can find in German documents of any era, only modern (19th-20th C.) France or German Alsace.
German. No evidence for this as a name in Germany, all usage seems to be either Scandinavia, from a town in Denmark, or France, as an isolated variation of Daugart/Daugert/Dagart
Albanian. Unsourced, typo or dialectal?. Chihunglu83 (talk) 20:35, 4 March 2025 (UTC)
Tatar, meaning "dawn". Previously kept after some bizarre disaster documented at Talk:бедбахт#дан, during which the entry author added Azerbaijani and Turkmen usage as evidence. The extensive resources provided at https://suzlek.antat.ru/ indicate clearly that the Tatar word for "dawn" is таң (tañ), not дан (dan). —Fish bowl (talk) 09:48, 5 March 2025 (UTC)
- RFV-failed. —Fish bowl (talk) 02:41, 2 December 2025 (UTC)
Ukrainian. No references given and it's not present in any dictionaries I looked at - my understanding is that the Ukrainian equivalent is "котушка". PhoenicianLetters (talk) 08:49, 6 March 2025 (UTC)
- Your understanding is correct. котушка is indeed the Ukrainian word. I also cannot find катушка in any Ukrainian dictionaries. It's also worth noting here that 78.37.216.35 (talk) (@78.37.216.35), who created the Ukrainian entry for катушка, added the edit summary "Minor addition". Voltaigne (talk) 10:26, 6 March 2025 (UTC)
Maltese. Rfv-sense: deer — Fenakhay (حيطي · مساهماتي) 09:14, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
Hawaiian. tagged but not listed. a perfectly reasonable loan, but might be hard to find ... print book searches are overwhelmed with false positives for the unrelated Japanese word since it will match anywhere in an entire document. Lollipop (talk) 14:15, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Ukrainian. Rationale was "Unsourced, does not exist in Ukrainian, added by an incompetent user". Ultimateria (talk) 18:32, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
- RFV-failed. Ultimateria (talk) 02:27, 15 June 2025 (UTC)
Old Slovak. Rationale was "this Korean IP is really problematic, adding Slavic languages(Sorbian etc.) without any given source". Ultimateria (talk) 19:32, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
- Just a reminder, the only digital source for Old Slovak is
{{R:sk:HSSJ}}. If one can't find the word in it, unless this certain Korean IP has a better source, I doubt the existence of the word. Chihunglu83 (talk) 19:40, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Ukrainian. Rationale was "Unsourced, IP is known to add questionable terms". Ultimateria (talk) 19:35, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Northern Kurdish. Rationale was "There is no letter "í" in the Northern Kurdish alphabet." Ultimateria (talk) 19:49, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Vietnamese: to design, to model, design. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 02:50, 10 March 2025 (UTC)
- Keep. Attestations:
- (2009) "Nhiều nhà vẽ kiểu thời trang khác còn phải lo tiết kiệm chi phí bằng cách không bán ra các cửa tiệm:" Vietnamese translation in Thời Trang Thời Khủng Hoảng: Tuổi Trẻ Việt Vẫn Thành Công of English original: "Other young designers are opting to bypass stores altogether to keep costs low." in Connections are key for new designers in hard times
- Tuấn Hoàng (2020) "Nhà vẽ kiểu quần áo thời trang Nhật qua đời vì nhiễm covid"; rough translation: "Japanese fashionable clothing designer passed away due to covid infection"
- (2023) "Phi hành gia NASA sắp diện thời trang Prada lên Mặt Trăng", quote: "Nhà Prada của Ý sẽ bắt tay vào việc vẽ kiểu bộ trang phụ[sic – meaning trang phục] đó với sự cộng tác của một công ty tư, là Axiom Space." rough translation: "The House of Prada will begin to design that suit in collaboration with Axiom Space, a private company."
- Even so, sometimes it's just an SoP; e.g.:
- Exodus 35:32, "để vẽ kiểu và chế tạo các vật bằng vàng, bạc, đồng," New Vietnamese Bible's translation vs. "to devise artistic designs, to work in gold, silver, and bronze,"New Revised Standard Version Updated Edition's translation
- So editors should be judicious when adding quotes. Erminwin (talk) 20:54, 27 May 2025 (UTC)
Tatar.
# to be [[exhausted]]; to be [[tired]].
seems like it should be әлсерәү (älseräw)?
https://suzlek.antat.ru/words.php?txtW=әлсерү&submit=Эзләү
https://suzlek.antat.ru/words.php?txtW=әлсерәү&submit=Эзләү
—Fish bowl (talk) 06:24, 10 March 2025 (UTC)
Hittite. Rfv-sense: for meaning "resin"; Kloekhorst gives "oil, fat"
Albanian. Etymologically possible, not entirely convinced it is used as a noun, potentially a regional word or protologism. Chihunglu83 (talk) 08:14, 13 March 2025 (UTC)
Albanian. 5 hits on Google, possible a regional word Chihunglu83 (talk) 08:35, 13 March 2025 (UTC)
сасновы
[edit]We've had a conflict with User:Наименее Полезное about the сасновы page, and I believe we’re unable to resolve it on our own. Therefore, I’d like to ask a third party to have a look at the article, following the guidelines from the Help:Dispute resolution page.
I believe that User:Наименее Полезное has unneedlessly complicated the translation I’ve added.
I’ve added “(relational) pine” and I believe this is a good definition: it provides everything needed to understand and use the word «сасновы» by relying on the English knowledge. «Сасновы лес» 'pine forest' is 'forest of pines', «сасновая смала» 'pine resin' is resin extracted from a pine, etc. The English usage mirrors the Belarusian usage, so we can keep a succint definition that is easy to read and use.
User:Наименее Полезное has added sub-sections of the meaning by following ТСБМ explanatory dictionary, such as “related to pines”, “derived from pines”, “overgrown by pines”, etc. I believe this clutters the page needlessly, and doesn’t actually help a reader (because English adjectival use of “pine” basically can have all the same meanings, and because these meanings are not exhaustive: it’s possible to come up with new ones, like “looking like a pine” [сасновы узор], “smelling like a pine” [сасновы асвяжальнік паветра], etc.).
What’s more, these meanings are not something unique to «сасновы»: all relational adjectives related to plants will have the same set of meanings. «Ружавы» 'rose', «чабрацовы» 'thyme', «вінаградны» 'grape' will have the same set of possible meanings. In the end, they’re just a variation on the basic theme “related to pines”.
I've tried a compromise approach, shifting his additions into a sub-meanings of the main meaning (even though I don’t think they are useful), but he restored the original layout. After this, we basically had an “edit war” where I’ve refererred to Wiktionary:Style guide#Types of definitions, and he referred to the existing practices in the Belarusian section of the English Wiktionary («making the entry longer has never been a problem, we have always done this format» [185]; although I’m not sure how representative this actually is of the Belarusian part of the Wiktionary).
I don’t think we can resolve the issue on our own, and I’d like a third party to have a look. Thanks! Хтосьці (talk) 13:34, 13 March 2025 (UTC)
- I am not a Belarusian editor but I would like to comment on the issue. I don't understand why there is so much discussion about these glosses, In Czech and Slovak and most other Slavic languages I see patterns like Наименее Полезное's being followed. And personally, I see glosses as a "bridge" that separates good entries from stubs, looking at the edit history of that specific entry, it doesn't seem polluted at all. F. V. Lorenz (talk) 13:52, 13 March 2025 (UTC)
- Are you sure? I've just checked the situation with Slovak, going through the Category:Slovak relational adjectives section.
- Of 583 articles, only 20 (<4%) have more than one meaning¹. Of these, most meanings are different in English, and none separates relational adjective into 5 sub-sections.
- Even though it could have. I’m pretty sure borovicový could have had “related to pine”, “derived from pine”, “overgrown with pines”, etc.
- I don’t have energy now to check Czech, but Slovak certainly doesn’t seem to follow Наименее Полезное’s patterns.
- ¹ These are: čapíkový, dominikánsky, fatamorganický, gazdovský, jedový, kamenný, kľúčový, kmeňový, kozí, letný, mačací, nosový, nutričný, okrajový, orlí, policajný, poľský, psí, sestrin, žaluďový Хтосьці (talk) 14:40, 13 March 2025 (UTC)
- These entries are only like this because most Czech and Slovak editors create quick and simple entries, they don't even check the entire dictionary, and I'm here to reverse this situation in my language. F. V. Lorenz (talk) 15:16, 13 March 2025 (UTC)
- Btw, I stand with Наименее Полезное the entry looked much more informative and pleasant before. F. V. Lorenz (talk) 15:18, 13 March 2025 (UTC)
- These entries are only like this because most Czech and Slovak editors create quick and simple entries, they don't even check the entire dictionary, and I'm here to reverse this situation in my language. F. V. Lorenz (talk) 15:16, 13 March 2025 (UTC)
- @Хтосьці I personally like your treatment and this is absolutely not the case of quick and simple entries. Have a quick look at Polish sosnowy, simple as that, and I will keep doing this in the same manner. Chihunglu83 (talk) 09:59, 14 March 2025 (UTC)
- I think sosnowy is an example of "good enough". I tend to be a maximalist and include a lot of information, look at my recent contributions for examples. That said, were someone to make an entry like sosnowy, I wouldn't be upset at the lack of information or references. Vininn126 (talk) 10:38, 14 March 2025 (UTC)
Albanian. Added 10 years ago and might be a regional word not found in a normative dictionary. Hope someone can help. Chihunglu83 (talk) 13:41, 13 March 2025 (UTC)
VRF-sense: to communicate. Duchuyfootball (talk) 08:13, 16 March 2025 (UTC)
Failed RfV. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 08:20, 25 September 2025 (UTC)
Vietnamese. No source to back it up (the only reference link is dead). Duchuyfootball (talk) 08:39, 16 March 2025 (UTC)
- A mirror of the reference can be found here. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 09:50, 1 April 2025 (UTC)
Welsh. This lemma form is not used in Welsh, and only occurs as a direct quotation. Welsh has no "q" in its orthography, and "u" does not correspond to /w/ in Welsh under any circumstances. Also Globse is not a reliable source at all. My suggestion would be to delete this Welsh entry; the corresponding form in Welsh is "cwiar".
To treat 'queer' as an 'unassimilated borrowing' would surely mean treating every casually used English word in Welsh during code-switching conversations as a 'Welsh' word, meaning that poetenially any English word is also a 'Welsh' one, which quickly leads to absurdity, at least in terms of lexicography. 2A00:23C7:21B4:FD01:EC9A:5E40:52C9:C188 20:08, 18 March 2025 (UTC)
- It's only anecdotal evidence, but as a Welsh speaker I've only ever seen the adapted form "cwiar", never the unadapted "queer" outside of Wenglish. Suntooooth, it/he (talk/contribs) 19:39, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
Indonesian. Can't be found in KBBI. Does this word actually exist in Indonesian or is a typo of tumbuh? I suspect that this word is actually of another language. Alfarizi M (talk) 06:08, 19 March 2025 (UTC)
Indonesian. Can't be found in KBBI. Possibly created in error. Alfarizi M (talk) 07:13, 19 March 2025 (UTC)
Vilamovian. Could we add a source, and could we find the exact Silesian word it comes from, rather than an estimate? vxern (Dorian M. Oszczęda) (talk) 12:25, 19 March 2025 (UTC)
Old Prussian. Rfv added by IP user, but no topic created here. Derksen doesn't mention this form. Exarchus (talk) 10:56, 20 March 2025 (UTC)
- We have an entry at ioūs, which includes several alternative spellings, but not this one. —Mahāgaja · talk 12:10, 20 March 2025 (UTC)
Silesian. Unsourced. Vininn126 (talk) 06:48, 21 March 2025 (UTC)
West Frisian. Not attested anywhere other than Frisian Wikipedia. Augustijn Bakker (talk) 20:00, 21 March 2025 (UTC)
Malay.
Malay.
Malay.
These entries were created by User:Duhose, which is now blocked for being a sock puppet of Eiskrahablo. A few IPs tagged these entries for speedy deletion before being replaced with rfv template. What do you think about these entries, @GinormousBuildings? Are they really used in Malay? Alfarizi M (talk) 20:16, 21 March 2025 (UTC)
- They are used in spoken colloquial Malay, but never spelled this way. The speaker will just use its English spelling in written Malay. The only sources I've found that use lokesyen as the spelling are all coming from Indonesian sources. By the way, imaginasi is more common than imejinesen, while misyen and lokesyen are more common than misi and lokasi in spoken colloquial Malay (atleast in Malaysia). Sponge2490 (talk) 08:08, 15 May 2025 (UTC)
Slovincian. Seems to be entirely forged. Should be babjy. Vininn126 (talk) 15:47, 22 March 2025 (UTC)
- I'm going to speedy mark this as RFV-failed. It's just a misspelling. Vininn126 (talk) 10:07, 26 March 2025 (UTC)
Chakma.
This is supposed to be an adjective, with the senses:
That makes no sense. Someone needs to find out what this really means and define it in grammatical English- or delete it.
Gujarati.
Same as above.
Bengali.
Same as above.
Someone has obviously copied the same nonsense from one entry to another. There's also Marathi दाखल (dākhal) in the lists of cognates, but it makes sense. I'm guessing that someone tried to model one of the entries above on the Marathi one, failed miserably, and then that was used as a model for the others. Chuck Entz (talk) 01:02, 24 March 2025 (UTC)
Arabic. Rfv-sense: household — Fenakhay (حيطي · مساهماتي) 23:45, 25 March 2025 (UTC)
Vietnamese. Rfv-sense: District 1, Ho Chi Minh City. I think this has currency, but good luck googling for it. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 03:40, 26 March 2025 (UTC)
- Probably it refers to the original/central districts (roughly the boundaries of former Saigon), as with what I've heard. With me, I actually used it liberally though, as to refer to the whole of Ho Chi Minh. HungKhanh0106 (talk) 11:30, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
- @MuDavid, @HungKhanh0106: Growing up I had been taught in school that Sài Gòn was HCMC's former name, only in junior middle-school did I learn from my father that the name Sài Gòn was still used informally to refer to District 1. I adduce two sources:
- Schellinger, Paul E., Salkin, Robert M., editors (1996), “Ho Chi Minh City (Vietnam)”, in International Dictionary of Historic Places, volumes 5. Asia and Oceania, New York: Routledge, page 353: ““Saigon” survives as the name of the central district of the conurbation and as the conventional transliteration of “Song Sai Gon,” the river on which Ho Chi Minh City stands.”
- alex_yue (12 April 2025), Threads[186] (in Vietnamese): “Từ hồi bé nhà mình đều dùng Sài Gòn để gọi quận nhất. Bây giờ thì không còn thấy ai gọi như thế nữa. ― Since my childhood, my whole family has been using Sài Gòn to call District 1. Now I see that no one does so any longer.” Many commenters agree with alex_yue.
- Erminwin (talk) 23:36, 8 June 2025 (UTC)
- Another source older than alex_yue's 2025 post:
- Hoàng Trọng Tín (30 December 2016), Facebook[187] (in Vietnamese), Comment under Tôi là người Sài Gòn's post: “Nhưng ng SG mình là ng địa phương nên biết rõ rằng SG (gồm Q1 & Q3) là 1 khu vực thuộc TpHcm, […] [Nhưng người Sài Gòn - mình là người địa phương - nên biết rõ ràng Sài Gòn (gồm Quận 1 và Quận 3) là một khu vực thuộc Thành phố Hồ Chí Minh, […] ] ― Yet local Saigoneers - like me - know clearly that Sài Gòn (comprising Districts 1 and 3) is an area within Hồ Chí Minh City, […] ”
- Erminwin (talk) 00:11, 9 June 2025 (UTC)
- One more source:
- I think Sài Gòn (“
District 1, Ho Chi Minh City[→] an area comprising Ho Chi Minh City's one or more central districts”) meets attestation criterion #2: "use in durably archived media, conveying meaning, in at least three independent instances spanning at least a year (different requirements apply for certain languages)" as it is attested in three sources: Hoàng Trọng Tín (2016), Tran Anh Vu (2024), and alex_yue (2025).Erminwin (talk) 00:41, 9 June 2025 (UTC)
- Another source older than alex_yue's 2025 post:
Maasai. Several sources cite the word as oldupai, which is the source of the English variant of the place name, Oldupai. (And I am not even sure that either is a real place name in Maasai, as some white anthropologist might have asked nearby Maasai what the place was called and a description could have been made up on the spot. Not saying this is more likely the case by default, but many similar things are known to have happened and so I can't rule it out.) — 2600:4808:9C30:C500:C44:B490:2CA3:CCEB 05:09, 26 March 2025 (UTC)
- I cleaned up the botanical part of it: sisal is an English word borrowed from Spanish for an unrelated South American plant and the fiber harvested from it- the original etymology incorrectly linked to it as a Maasai word. The common name "wild sisal" refers to an East African plant, Sansevieria ehrenbergii (Wikipedia has it under Dracaena hanningtonii) that also produces fiber. The plant that comes to mind when the genus Sansevieria is mentioned is a houseplant better known as "mother-in-law's tongue" (now classified as Dracaena trifasciata), but also called bowstring hemp. If you go to the WP article for Dracaena hanningtonii, it discusses the relationship between the plant name and the place name. Chuck Entz (talk) 06:24, 26 March 2025 (UTC)
Indonesian. See also WT:AID "detailed consideration". Exists in a regional language doesn't always mean it exists too in Indonesian. Alfarizi M (talk) 17:31, 26 March 2025 (UTC)
Vietnamese. Very enthusiastically created by @HWJunAN, tagged by PhanAnh123 with comment, “What are some attestations of this in the meaning of "picture book, comics" in contexts that are not obvious foreignism? If it's just a foreignism, it still can be kept but ought to be edited accordingly so ("orthographical borrowing from Japanese", etc.)”. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 03:37, 28 March 2025 (UTC)
- I see the term being attested in a dictionary published in Saigon in 1970[189][190], so maybe there could be extended use since that period (and from which sets it apart from being purely Sino-Vietnamese). HungKhanh0106 (talk) 11:40, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
Vietnamese. Rfv-sense: cooking pot, added by @Crazy Cat Annamese. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 03:41, 28 March 2025 (UTC)
- From my experience, no usage. Maybe it should be labeled archaic. On the other hand, I don't find any attestation of "nghẹ" meaning "soot" either. Duchuyfootball (talk) 14:15, 15 April 2025 (UTC)
April 2025
[edit]Dutch. Any real usage? 2A00:23C5:FE1C:3701:81B3:C9CA:3C82:2DE6 13:52, 28 March 2025 (UTC)
- Such contrived compounds exist only as mentions. This one only exists as an example of the almost unlimited capability of compounding Dutch nouns. One could go further and discuss the tenure of the hottentottententententoonstellingsterreinbewakersbondsvoorzitter (the president of the union of guards of the Khoikhoi tent exhibition grounds), but whoever penned this shorter compound noun must have felt it already illustrated the point sufficiently. Using Hottentotten to refer to the Khoikhoi is politically incorrect; writing it with a lowercase ⟨h⟩ is orthographically incorrect. ‑‑Lambiam 08:16, 2 April 2025 (UTC)
- Do the capitalization rules for Hottentotten apply to compounds whose heads are words like terrein and voorzitter? There are certainly languages where they wouldn't, but I don't know about Dutch. —Mahāgaja · talk 16:33, 3 April 2025 (UTC)
Old High German. apparently created as part of a number of unverified etymology trees, this seems to be a US form and frequent typo for Polish Bargiel. needs double checking for OHG citations on MDZ at least
Indonesian. Also, I was going to change the header to "Malay", but I didn't do it because it's labelled with 'Id' in Kamus Dewan. Alfarizi M (talk) 00:52, 5 April 2025 (UTC)
Indonesian. Alfarizi M (talk) 02:05, 5 April 2025 (UTC)
Indonesian. Alfarizi M (talk) 02:33, 5 April 2025 (UTC)
Translingual. Self-RFV because i am adding an entry that's marked as citation needed on Wikipedia (look at the lead section of wikipedia:Hamburgevons) 176.223.103.201 09:45, 5 April 2025 (UTC)
- Why did you add it then? Hftf (talk) 00:41, 15 September 2025 (UTC)
Phrygian. Rfv for sense "whom?". From what Dunkel gives at {{R:ine:LIPP|page=454|vol=2}}, it rather means "something" and is etymologically related to Sanskrit किम् (kim, neuter). Exarchus (talk) 11:57, 5 April 2025 (UTC)
- And then https://palaeolexicon.com/ gives "which, that, who"... Exarchus (talk) 12:15, 5 April 2025 (UTC)
Indonesian. Also, is this really from Minangkabau or another language? Alfarizi M (talk) 01:28, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
Swahili, “willow”. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 03:12, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
Vietnamese. Rfv-sense: không trung. Is this at all used outside of trên không? MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 03:20, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
- I think "không" in that sense also included compounds outside of trên không: không phận, không chiến, không gian, không khí, không kích, không lực, không tập, không trung, không vận, hàng không, thám không, thinh không, thu không. If you wonder where I took all that from, I took them from https://chunom.net (a dictionary aggregator) HungKhanh0106 (talk) 15:55, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
- In none of the words you give is không an independent word. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 02:36, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
- But still, I think the sense could be kept in similar fashion to some other Sino-Viet syllables only found in compound words, e.g. with the label "chiefly in compounds and trên không". HungKhanh0106 (talk) 08:04, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
- In none of the words you give is không an independent word. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 02:36, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
- What is your point here... A definition can't only be a part of only one fixed phrase? :/ Duchuyfootball (talk) 14:22, 15 April 2025 (UTC)
- @Duchuyfootball: Not really. What I am saying here is that the word can be given such definition when there are numerous Sino-Vietnamese compounds (plus trên không) having the word with the similar sense. HungKhanh0106 (talk) 03:48, 27 April 2025 (UTC)
- I'm replying to David. Cheers 🙌 Duchuyfootball (talk) 09:17, 27 April 2025 (UTC)
- Were you now? Not sure I understand you, though. My point is that if this sense is only ever used in that one phrase, it should not be listed as a sense, but at most as
{{only used in}}. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 01:24, 28 April 2025 (UTC)- I didn't know that template exists when creating the entry. Well you live and learn... Duchuyfootball (talk) 09:06, 28 April 2025 (UTC)
- Were you now? Not sure I understand you, though. My point is that if this sense is only ever used in that one phrase, it should not be listed as a sense, but at most as
- I'm replying to David. Cheers 🙌 Duchuyfootball (talk) 09:17, 27 April 2025 (UTC)
- @Duchuyfootball: Not really. What I am saying here is that the word can be given such definition when there are numerous Sino-Vietnamese compounds (plus trên không) having the word with the similar sense. HungKhanh0106 (talk) 03:48, 27 April 2025 (UTC)
Vietnamese. Rfv-sense: electrical resistance. This is attestable, I think, but the sense of “resistor” clogs up search results. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 03:27, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
- This showed up in Vietnamese textbook, and it only gives the meaning "resistor" for the word, so maybe the rfv'd sense could just be someone's mistake? HungKhanh0106 (talk) 15:41, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
- "Resistor" is not the only definition. "Gỗ có điện trở cao" means "wood has high electrical resistance", not "wood has high resistor". Duchuyfootball (talk) 14:38, 15 April 2025 (UTC)
Indonesian. Alfarizi M (talk) 09:19, 8 April 2025 (UTC)
Urdu.
This has all the hallmarks of a protologism, but I don't know how to verify usage in Urdu. I do notice a lot of hits for Arabic تبريز or Persian تبریز in the results. Chuck Entz (talk) 13:55, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
- Removed in diff. —Granger (talk · contribs) 17:05, 22 September 2025 (UTC)
חנות משכונות (April 2025)
[edit]Hebrew. This compound makes sense but actually it is hardly attested. Once at [191]. Possibly, on [192], [193], [194]. In modern periodicals one can find a few more cases of בתי משכונות in the same sense. Danny lost (talk) 22:01, 9 April 2025 (UTC)
- There's already an RFV for this word listed above, started about 3 years ago and never concluded. —Mahāgaja · talk 06:31, 10 April 2025 (UTC)
Uyghur. Rfv-sense: chopstick. Entered by User:Orexan. According to my sources, it's "handcuff(s), not chopstick(s)". --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 22:54, 10 April 2025 (UTC)
- Or it can be both? https://lughet.com/ actually says it's both chopsticks and handcuffs. Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 22:57, 10 April 2025 (UTC)
- RFV withdrawn, as I found that both senses exist. --Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 03:08, 11 April 2025 (UTC)
Persian. Presumably با (with) + تأنی (deliberation). --Light hearted sam (talk) 14:20, 12 April 2025 (UTC)
Turkish, "calendar".
Not in {{R:tr:OTK}} with this meaning, only as a regional borrowing from Russian таре́лка (tarélka, “plate”). Not in {{R:tr:NewRedhouse}}. Not in Turkish Wiktionary. In several places populated by bots copying the definition here. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 22:01, 13 April 2025 (UTC)
- RFV-failed. —Granger (talk · contribs) 18:09, 22 September 2025 (UTC)
Rfv-sense: only. Duchuyfootball (talk) 13:53, 15 April 2025 (UTC)
Five months and not a single cite. RfV failed. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 08:38, 25 September 2025 (UTC)
Old Uyghur. Rationale was "Does not exist. Another a priori created otk/oui word, see 𐰢𐰍." Before User:AmaçsızBirKişi edited this page, it was an Old Turkic lemma with references. Ultimateria (talk) 19:08, 15 April 2025 (UTC)
- It wouldn't be accurate to call it "non-existing", yes, but see this page, where I moved it.
- Attested only twice in Old Turkic script, as 𐰢𐰍𐰴𐰀 (mGKa [amġa-ḳa, dative case]) and 𐰢𐰍𐰀 (mGa [amġa]) , I choose the former following Wilkens (2021), who lists this lemma as "2(a)mg(a) (r) † → (ı)mg(a)."
- I'll add it as an orthographic variant of mG we already have, if you don't object.
- AmaçsızBirKişi (talk) 19:27, 15 April 2025 (UTC)
- I'm not familiar with these languages but I see that the deleted Old Turkic lemma included an etymology section, a quote and references - I'm wondering if this information was removed in error? Einstein2 (talk) 22:07, 27 April 2025 (UTC)
- No, it wasn't. Two references that were there previously, Clauson (1972) and Tekin (1993) both link this word with Irk Bitig, an Old Uyghur Manichaean work written in 930. Definitely not Old Turkic (and you're not the first one to question this either, but I believe Turkic editors are mostly rolling along with my change to transfer IB-specific words to Old Uyghur namespace.)
- I can add the quotation (which will be more accurate than the previous one, with scans and everything,) if you are still unsure/doubtful.
- AmaçsızBirKişi (talk) 22:26, 27 April 2025 (UTC)
- I'm not familiar with these languages but I see that the deleted Old Turkic lemma included an etymology section, a quote and references - I'm wondering if this information was removed in error? Einstein2 (talk) 22:07, 27 April 2025 (UTC)
Indonesian. Where did you find this word, @User:Rex Aurorum? Maybe I can guess the definition after that. Alfarizi M (talk) 00:27, 17 April 2025 (UTC)
- Page 163 of Laporan pelaksanaan rentjana pembangunan lima tahun, 1956-1960. ―Rex Aurōrum｢Disputātiō｣ 01:15, 17 April 2025 (UTC)
Gaulish. I don't know what the two Gaulish dictionaries listed in the References say, but if this name is attested only in inscriptions in Great Britain, surely it's some early form of Proto-Brythonic, not Gaulish. —Mahāgaja · talk 06:08, 17 April 2025 (UTC)
Old Prussian. This was tagged for RFV by an IP in 2023; presumably they are disputing the correctness of the paradigm shown in the table. It's currently used only at pennings. This, that and the other (talk) 22:50, 19 April 2025 (UTC)
Turkish. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 16:17, 21 April 2025 (UTC)
- I added some quotes Bartanaqa (talk) 01:59, 28 April 2025 (UTC)
- RFV-passed. Ultimateria (talk) 22:28, 21 November 2025 (UTC)
Tajik. — BABR・talk 00:38, 23 April 2025 (UTC)
- RFV-failed. —Granger (talk · contribs) 18:17, 22 September 2025 (UTC)
German. Created by an IP in 2019. Jberkel 08:18, 23 April 2025 (UTC)
- RFV-failed Jberkel 09:09, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
West Frisian. User:Augustijn Bakker marked this for speedy, claiming that this word does not exist. — SURJECTION / T / C / L / 17:03, 23 April 2025 (UTC)
Indonesian. I think the entry can be replaced with Ninggerum's if this word only exists in that language. Alfarizi M (talk) 20:48, 23 April 2025 (UTC)
Dutch, Created by a blocked user, and I think a verification is needed. 49.145.100.19 00:08, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
- The user who created the entry is not blocked, and has been an admin here since 2007- two years before they created the entry. It was changed from "misspelling" to "obsolete spelling" by a native speaker, then changed to "superseded spelling" by another native speaker. I don't see the point of this rfv. Chuck Entz (talk) 04:09, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
- Closed - the IP did no research at all. This is trivially attestable through BGC. — SURJECTION / T / C / L / 06:14, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
Vietnamese, etymology 2. I want to request for example where this word is used independently (other than in phóng tác). In addition, I'm interested if "phóng" in phóng tác is from etymology 2. Duchuyfootball (talk) 14:40, 25 April 2025 (UTC)
German. — This unsigned comment was added by 176.124.222.73 (talk) at 12:30, 26 April 2025 (UTC).
Coptic. I just want to confirm that ⲃⲉⲗⲓⲥⲁⲣⲁⲓⲟⲥ (belisaraios) is the correct spelling. I don't know Coptic at all, but most Coptic terms derived from Ancient Greek seem to keep the original spelling more or less unchanged, so are we sure it isn't spelled ⲃⲉⲗⲓⲥⲁⲣⲓⲟⲥ (belisarios)? @Ⲁⲡⲟⲗⲗⲟⲇⲱⲣⲟⲥ is the entry creator. —Mahāgaja · talk 18:53, 27 April 2025 (UTC)
German. Does not exist on its own, the spelling "First-Class" is only used in compounds, otherwise it's First Class (noun) or first class (adjective). Jberkel 15:36, 29 April 2025 (UTC)
- RFV-failed Jberkel 08:31, 2 June 2025 (UTC)
May 2025
[edit]Norwegian. Not found outside the wikiverse. This, that and the other (talk) 05:43, 1 May 2025 (UTC)
- No results for "biangbiangnudler", "biangbiangnudlene" or even "biangbiang" at https://nb.no (the digitised archives of the National Library of Norway). "biang biang-nudlene" shows one result on nb.no ([195]:
Deres dan dan-nudler og de håndlagde, tykke biang biang-nudlene er verd et besøk i seg selv.
). "biang biang-nudler" shows 0 results. Most online sources seem to be AI translated, except for this godt.no article:Kokk Sue Zhou lager biang biang-nudler, som også kalles «hand pulled noodles».
It might be too early for inclusion on Wiktionary, as there are just too few quotes available to attest this word for Norwegian. ArcticSeeress (talk) 09:10, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
- RFV-failed. Ultimateria (talk) 22:27, 21 November 2025 (UTC)
Indonesian. Is this attested in (common) Indonesian or just in the regional language Bahau? Alfarizi M (talk) 01:26, 2 May 2025 (UTC)
Persian. Couldn't find anything on this form outside wikipedia. Light hearted sam (talk) 08:55, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
Banjarese. Is this shortened form really used? (except for the prefix sa-). Alfarizi M (talk) 10:13, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
Persian, specifically for its usage as a noun. I have, on the other hand, found examples of adjectival use (though i'm not sure that would be worth including as it seems to be an inflection of مؤثر) — BABR・talk 03:09, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
- @Babr Yeah, couldn't find anything on it as a noun. The equivalent for "effectiveness" would be تأثیر/اثر not مؤثری. Light hearted sam (talk) 06:52, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
Albanian. Rfv-sense:
Çabej, E. (1987) “canguletë”, in Studime etimologjike në fushë të shqipes (in Albanian), volumes III: C–D, Tirana, page 10
...Me këtë cangull mund të jetë një, si "send i fryrë, rrumbullak" (inflated object, round object), edhe cangull "brâsh, pjepën a shalqi i papjekur", bashkë me frazën me mbetë cangull "ngri trupi".
— This unsigned comment was added by Mondiad2 (talk • contribs) at 01:30, 9 May 2025 (UTC).
Dutch. Rfv-sense: "To fall in addition" (queried by someone on the talk page). 2A00:23C5:FE1C:3701:F466:18CA:8E32:5020 14:08, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
- That would be “bij (iemand) vallen”. I think we should just delete this sense. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 08:43, 25 September 2025 (UTC)
Turkish. Added by @Embryomystic in 2016. I think the word is only Crimean Tatar and not Turkish. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 14:04, 13 May 2025 (UTC)
- I have no idea why I would have added that; Turkish is not a language I work with very often at all. I would not argue with its total removal, unless someone can find it in a Turkish dictionary. It's not showing up in a quick Google search, though Google translate seems to think that it's a Turkish word. Very strange. embryomystic (talk) 22:49, 13 May 2025 (UTC)
- RFV-failed. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 18:53, 24 June 2025 (UTC)
Icelandic. Can't find in any sources. Actually fleki or jarðfleki. Numberguy6 (talk) 17:25, 13 May 2025 (UTC)
This is a grammatically incorrect form of Scottish Gaelic deoch an dorais. It does appear in English contexts, but does not seem to be used in Gaelic itself. Zacwill (talk) 15:36, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
As with deoch an doras, this is an erroneous form of Scottish Gaelic deoch an dorais, appearing in English but not in Gaelic itself. Zacwill (talk) 15:43, 14 May 2025 (UTC)
- If either of these two is relatively common, we could mark them as
{{misspelling of}}rather than{{alt form}}. —Mahāgaja · talk 21:41, 14 May 2025 (UTC) - RFV-failed (for both). Zacwill (talk) 02:39, 7 August 2025 (UTC)
Vietnamese. Rfv-sense: (physics) gravitation. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 03:00, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
- Keep. Yet hấp dẫn must also be classified as fundamentally an adjective meaning "(physics) gravitational". To become a noun meaning "gravity" & "gravitation", hấp dẫn (“(physics) gravitational”) needs nominalizer "sự"; e.g.
- "nơi sự hấp dẫn lượng tử chi phối" in Nguyễn thị Bình's 2011 Vietnamese translation (1v) from "where quantum gravity rules" from Zeeya Merali's 2009 article (1e),
- "Newton hợp nhất sự hấp dẫn của trái đất và bầu trời" in Anh Vũ's Vietnamese translation (2v) of "Newton unified terrestrial and celestial gravity" in John Carlos Baez's tweet quoted in Dylan Loeb McClain's 2021 article (2e)
- Even so, nominalizer "sự" may be elided; e.g.
- "lý thuyết của Newton về hấp dẫn dựa trên một mô hình còn đơn giản hơn" in Cao Chi's & Phạm Văn Thiều's 2000 Vietnamese translation (3v) of "Newton’s theory of gravity was based on an even simpler model" in Stephen Hawking's book (3e)
- "lý thuyết hấp dẫn của Newton, một lý thuyết rất hợp với trực giác và đã được thực nghiệm kiểm chứng nhiều lần [...] Einstein đã giải quyết được xung đột này bằng cách đưa ra một cách mô tả mới về hấp dẫn" in Phạm Văn Thiều's Vietnamese translation (4v, pp. 6-7) of "Newton's experimentally successful and intuitively pleasing universal theory of gravitation [...] It was Einstein, again, who stepped in and resolved the conflict by offering a new conception of gravity" in Brian Greene's book (4e, p. 7).
- 17:02, 27 May 2025 (UTC) Erminwin (talk) 17:02, 27 May 2025 (UTC)
Navajo; is this form really attested? The voicer in the file clearly says nahísóotą́ with a high tone on Í.
American Sign Language.
The page name says O Across, K Across; production section says O Forward, K Forward; pictures c:File:ASL O@Side-PalmForward.jpg, c:File:ASL_K@Side-PalmForward.jpg say O Forward, K Forward in both their descriptions and file names.
OK#Translations 3 has O@Side-PalmForward K@Side-PalmForward as translation for the adjective senses "all right, permitted" and "satisfactory".
O@Side-PalmAcross K@Side-PalmAcross used to be O@Side-PalmForward K@Side-PalmForward, but it was moved 5 years ago by @Numberguy6 More accurate description
, but I guess they forgot to update the content of the production section on the page, the description of the pictures, the translations on OK, and the file names of the pictures.
P.S. I don't know whether as @Numberguy6 claimed and the title currently says, it is actually Across, Across; or if it is really Forward, Forward as O@Side-PalmAcross K@Side-PalmAcross#Production and everything else say. I am just reporting the contradicting information I have noticed. o/ Emanuele6 (talk) 21:40, 29 May 2025 (UTC)
- While the pictures say "palm forward", they clearly show the palm facing across. Numberguy6 (talk) 22:37, 29 May 2025 (UTC)
- @Numberguy6 Sorry, but I do not know how a "O@Side-PalmForward" vs "O@Side-PalmAcross" is supposed to look like in ASL. Also that does not really help: even if it were an Across in the picture, it could just be that the pictures are using the wrong sign (again, don't know, it could be a Forward), why does it have to be that the pagename, and everything else was wrong?
- Anyway, do you think O@Side-PalmAcross K@Side-PalmAcross#Production should be updated to say Across Across too? Changing the pagename without updating the production section definitely is not right! o/ Emanuele6 (talk) 22:59, 29 May 2025 (UTC)
- O@Side-PalmForward would have the palm facing the viewer directly, but I don't know whether O is ever produced that way in ASL. In [196], for example, every letter except O is palm-forward, but O is palm-across. —Mahāgaja · talk 07:07, 30 May 2025 (UTC)
Dutch. Rfv-sense: "dude, guy" -- pik and lul are used this way, but piemel most certainly is not in my experience. — Mnemosientje (t · c) 20:07, 30 May 2025 (UTC)
- My experience is exactly the same, pik and lul, but not piemel. Thadh (talk) 20:12, 30 May 2025 (UTC)
Tajik, specifically the short-lived reformed Arabic spelling. It doesn't seem correct and I suspect it was just a guess. Additionally, it was added by Crash48 who added entries in limited-use orthographies in other languages, some of which Blueskies006 has marked for RfD as well. — BABR・talk 23:21, 31 May 2025 (UTC)
June 2025
[edit]Vietnamese. I can't find this word in CXH's dictionary, but when googling it is mostly found on Vietnamese websites that teaches Chinese. – Nguyên Hưng Trần (talk) 04:52, 1 June 2025 (UTC)
- @ChemPro Did you find this word on those websites? – Nguyên Hưng Trần (talk) 04:56, 1 June 2025 (UTC)
- It's been a week since I requested this word for verification, too sad this user no longer edits. @PhanAnh123, Billcipher123, Erminwin Does any Vietnamese documents use this word? I only find it in Vietnamese websites that teaches Chinese. – Nguyên Hưng Trần (talk) 03:04, 8 June 2025 (UTC)
- @Nguyên Hưng Trần: I vote Keep. bất cập vật is found in scholarly works, for examples:
- Trần Trọng Dương, PhD Nguyễn Trãi Quốc Âm Từ Điển, entry "thác"; quote: "① đgt. <từ cổ> gửi, nhờ, động từ bất cập vật. Ai trách hiềm cây, lại trách mình, vốn xưa một cội thác cùng cành. (Bảo kính 151.2)."
- Nguyễn Hoàng Anh (2017), “Đặc đIểm ngữ pháp của tổ hợp V+N trong tiếng Hán (đốI chiếu với tiếng Việt)”, in Tạp chí Nghiên cứu Nước ngoài (in Vietnamese), volume 33, number 1, page 3: “Đây là hiện tượng cập vật hoá của một số động từ bất cập vật trong tiếng Hán.”
- Nguyễn Ngọc Lân, PhD (December 2019), “Nghiên cứu hiện tượng chuyển loại của từ trong văn ngôn tiếng Trung Quốc”, in Tạp chí Khoa học Ngoại ngữ (in Vietnamese), number 60, page 114: “Trong văn ngôn tiếng Trung Quốc, cách dùng sử động đối với động từ tường chỉ xuất hiện ở động từ bất cập vật (intransitive verb/nội động từ).”
- Erminwin (talk) 04:37, 8 June 2025 (UTC)
- I don't have any strong opinion, but aren't those exactly the Sinologist and Chinese language learning/research contexts that this term seems to be restricted to? It's whether these language-specific terms should be allowed that I'm not sure about. PhanAnh123 (talk) 06:11, 8 June 2025 (UTC)
- @Nguyên Hưng Trần: I vote Keep. bất cập vật is found in scholarly works, for examples:
- It's been a week since I requested this word for verification, too sad this user no longer edits. @PhanAnh123, Billcipher123, Erminwin Does any Vietnamese documents use this word? I only find it in Vietnamese websites that teaches Chinese. – Nguyên Hưng Trần (talk) 03:04, 8 June 2025 (UTC)
Silesian. Tagged but not listed for RFD by User:Vxern, I changed it to RFV. This form is indeed unetymological, I am likely to speedy fail it. Vininn126 (talk) 07:22, 2 June 2025 (UTC)
Is this form actually attested in Old English? It's listed in Bosworth-Toller, but the only citations given are other dictionaries. The usual OE name for Cornwall was Cornwealas. Zacwill (talk) 10:54, 3 June 2025 (UTC)
Translingual. Rationale was "NO-3216 isn't an ISO code". Ultimateria (talk) 17:14, 3 June 2025 (UTC)
Indonesian. Seems not attested, and KBBI labels this word with "ukp Bld" here, which is "ungkapan Belanda" (Dutch phrase). Alfarizi M (talk) 20:58, 3 June 2025 (UTC)
Pennsylvania German. Not in the online Pennsylvania Dutch Dictionary. 0DF (talk) 14:33, 4 June 2025 (UTC)
Serbo-Croatian. Mass creation of names by a blocked user. A cleanup is in need. Chihunglu83 (talk) 14:41, 5 June 2025 (UTC)
Russian. I didn't find this usage to be very widespread. Lerman (talk) 21:48, 6 June 2025 (UTC)
Esperanto. — Fenakhay (حيطي · مساهماتي) 00:43, 7 June 2025 (UTC)
- I just tried adding some quotations, three for each sense. It is not a terribly common word, so I had to resort to using a few websites as sources, with archive URLs of course. The book "Samuel Bogumił Linde kaj lia provo krei interslavan esperanton" does not have an ISBN that I can find, but proof of its existence can be found here and here, and its title (including the word "interslavan") is also mentioned in the article "Tri legindaj nacilingvaj libroj pri interlingvistiko" from the magazine Esperanto, issue 4 of 2003. Spenĉjo (talk) 02:38, 7 June 2025 (UTC)
- I added three more quotations from books and a scientific journal. The first sense now no longer relies on web sources for attestation requirements. The second sense still only has two non-web quotations, so it would need "a consensus through a discussion lasting at least two weeks" according to WT:ATTEST. Spenĉjo (talk) 23:28, 2 July 2025 (UTC)
Vietnamese bò vàng was initially defined as:
- "(derogatory) reactionary; a sympathizer of the former Republic of Vietnam", and
- "(derogatory, Overseas Vietnamese) a sympathizer of conservative ideologies and parties, especially the Republican Party in the United States".
I reasoned that "def 2 […] is subsumable under "reactionary" (the Republicans are reactionaries hell-bent on rolling back progress). Reactionary in turn (imho) results from semantic broadening of RVN's sympathizers" and re-wrote both defs as:
- (derogatory) a sympathizer of the former Republic of Vietnam
- (derogatory, by extension) reactionary(Can we verify(+) this sense?)
New sense 1 is firmly established, & I need new def 2 "reactionary" to be verified. While sympathizers of the right-wing, anti-communist former RVN must needs be right-wing anti-communists and thus perceivable as reactionaries, not all reactionaries are sympathizers of the right-wing, anti-communist former RVN.Erminwin (talk) 16:50, 7 June 2025 (UTC)
- Why not RFV the original definition 2 instead, and then, if that fails RFV, we can look at broadening it? —Soap— 20:25, 7 June 2025 (UTC)
- @Soap: Well, because "a sympathizer of conservative ideologies and parties, (especially the Republican Party in the United States)" is subsumable under "reactionary". That was why I subsumed orig def. 2 under sub-def "reactionary" of orig def 1, which I then split (EDIT: because not every reactionary is a sympathizer of the former RVN) into:
- current def 1 "a sympathizer of the former Republic of Vietnam"
- current def 2 "reactionary" (theoretically extendable from and possibly extended from current def 1 but I'm not sure)
- Erminwin (talk) 21:01, 7 June 2025 (UTC)
- I would prefer to see the original definition go through RFV, as it's far more specific and thus potentially more useful for someone encountering the word in use. You could have added your broader sense and RFV'ed both instead of replacing the existing one. However, I suppose while searching for cites for the 2nd sense, we can discern the finer meanings, and if most of them are talking about the US Republican party, we can change the wording accordingly. I have no fluency in Vietnamese but with a quick search of Twitter I can only add that if bò vàng can refer to Western politics, so can its antonym bò đỏ, as the two phrases seem so often to be used together. —Soap— 21:07, 7 June 2025 (UTC)
- @Soap: Alright! I'll restore original def. 2 as
def. 3sub-def 2.1:- (derogatory, by extension) reactionary(Can we verify(+) this sense?)
- (derogatory, Overseas Vietnamese) a sympathizer of conservative ideologies and parties, especially the Republican Party in the United States(Can we verify(+) this sense?)
- Erminwin (talk) 21:17, 7 June 2025 (UTC)
- @Soap: Alright! I'll restore original def. 2 as
- I would prefer to see the original definition go through RFV, as it's far more specific and thus potentially more useful for someone encountering the word in use. You could have added your broader sense and RFV'ed both instead of replacing the existing one. However, I suppose while searching for cites for the 2nd sense, we can discern the finer meanings, and if most of them are talking about the US Republican party, we can change the wording accordingly. I have no fluency in Vietnamese but with a quick search of Twitter I can only add that if bò vàng can refer to Western politics, so can its antonym bò đỏ, as the two phrases seem so often to be used together. —Soap— 21:07, 7 June 2025 (UTC)
- @Soap: Well, because "a sympathizer of conservative ideologies and parties, (especially the Republican Party in the United States)" is subsumable under "reactionary". That was why I subsumed orig def. 2 under sub-def "reactionary" of orig def 1, which I then split (EDIT: because not every reactionary is a sympathizer of the former RVN) into:
Vietnamese. Same reason as bất cập vật. – Nguyên Hưng Trần (talk) 03:07, 8 June 2025 (UTC)
- @Nguyên Hưng Trần: Again, I vote to Keep cập vật, which meets attestation criterion #2. Examples:
- Trần Trọng Dương, PhD. Nguyễn Trãi Quốc Âm Từ Điển, entry "thác"; quote: "② đgt. <từ cổ> gửi theo, nương theo, động từ cập vật. Mui thác trăng dương thế hứng, buồm nhân gió, mặc khi phiêu. (Tự thán 101.3)."
- Trương Văn Vỹ (2013), “Những biến đổi trong ngữ pháp tiếng Nga hiện nay”, in Tạp chí Khoa học ĐHQGHN, Nghiên cứu Nước ngoài (in Vietnamese), volume 29, number 1S: “Hiện cũng đang rất phổ biến trên báo chí và các phương tiện truyền thông đại chúng mối liên hệ kết hợp giữa a) động từ cập vật và b) động từ bất cập vật với cùng một hình thái bổ ngữ: […]”
- Nguyễn Ngọc Lân, phD (December 2019), “Nghiên cứu hiện tượng chuyển loại của từ trong văn ngôn tiếng Trung Quốc”, in Tạp chí Khoa học Ngoại ngữ (in Vietnamese), number 60, page 114: “Trường hợp động từ cập vật (transitive verb/ngoại động từ) dùng theo cách "sử động" trong văn ngôn tiếng Trung Quốc tuy có nhưng rất ít gặp […]”
- Erminwin (talk) 15:51, 8 June 2025 (UTC)
Old High German.
Occurs once, in a 17th C. list by Melchior Goldast. https://www.digitale-sammlungen.de/view/bsb11439844?page=134%2C135 Forstemann seems dubious. "Funtan. Gld. II. a, 100. Ist die lesung richtig, so hätten wir hier den natürlichsten nmen eines findelkindes vor uns." "If the reading is correct, we would have the most natural name for a foundling before us." — This unsigned comment was added by Griffon77 (talk • contribs) at 11:39, 9 June 2025 (UTC).
Dargwa. The article needs an original source. Lerman (talk) 16:51, 12 June 2025 (UTC)
- @ɶLerman. You can easily verify this and other Dargwa entries with Template:R:dar:Temirbulatova:2022. No need to RFV everything you see. Vahag (talk) 16:59, 12 June 2025 (UTC)
- @Vahagn Petrosyan: We should add the reference to the page then. I think this is exactly the reason why we should add references when we create pages, to avoid people RFV'ing them. Thadh (talk) 18:12, 12 June 2025 (UTC)
- @Thadh: Yes, but Lerman knows how to use Caucasian reference templates himself. I don't know why he is being lazy. Vahag (talk) 18:45, 12 June 2025 (UTC)
- @Vahagn Petrosyan: We should add the reference to the page then. I think this is exactly the reason why we should add references when we create pages, to avoid people RFV'ing them. Thadh (talk) 18:12, 12 June 2025 (UTC)
Old English. Any evidence that this form existed? Zacwill (talk) 02:52, 14 June 2025 (UTC)
- RFV-failed. Zacwill (talk) 02:36, 7 August 2025 (UTC)
Esperanto.
I have searched the following with no results:
TranqyPoo (talk) 00:36, 15 June 2025 (UTC)
- Added 2 quotes; one not being CFI-able until next year. Unable to find more. TranqyPoo (talk) 18:30, 24 October 2025 (UTC)
Esperanto. Rfv-sense: film, cinema
Please see ChatGPT results. Although not authoritative, it is a good starting point. TranqyPoo (talk) 11:33, 16 June 2025 (UTC)
- As a fluent Esperanto speaker, "film, cinema" is practically the only sense of the word in modern Esperanto, and the only sense mentioned in Esperanto dictionaries. I'm frankly surprised to find out that the sense "movie theater" was ever common. In the corpus Tekstaro de Esperanto, every single use of the word prior to 1960 (29 hits in total) seems to be with the meaning "movie theater", and almost every use of the word after 1960 (101 hits in total) is with the meaning "film, cinema". Accordingly, I've marked the former sense as archaic. I also added plenty of quotations to both senses, all from texts in the aforementioned corpus. Spenĉjo (talk) 21:50, 3 July 2025 (UTC)
RFV-passed, thank you! TranqyPoo (talk) 19:28, 24 October 2025 (UTC)
Surely this is not a suffix in any way; the entry itself notes it is not a suffix. This "suffix" is supposedly a suffix for some foregin words, but it's actually just a bunch of suffixes from other languages (-er, -or, -eur) that happen to become őr in hungarian NS1729 (talk) 07:52, 17 June 2025 (UTC)
Greenlandic declension of ukioq (winter, year)
[edit]Perhaps someone could verify whether the instrumental plural should be ukiunik instead of ukiumi, which is the locative singular. This form occurs in the Wikipedia article about the bowhead whale in Greenlandic. This shows that the Wiktionary volunteers would do well to consult other sources such as Wikipedia, Google Translate etc to find the full inflection of words not only in Greenlandic but also in other inflected languages Johnling60 (talk) 20:36, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
- Or it might well show that Wikipedia volunteers should consult Wiktionary while writing an article in a language they don't know. I don't know Greelandic, but Wikipedia and Google Translate are definitely not sources we should use in verifying this. Thadh (talk) 00:21, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
farm#Translations: Tatar фирме, пирме
[edit]* Tatar: {{t|tt|фирме}}, {{t|tt|пирме}}
The resources at https://suzlek.antat.ru/index.php do not record фирме nor пирме; they record ферма. @Sebirkhan —Fish bowl (talk) 23:23, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
- https://www.antat.ru/ru/iyli/publishing/book/2021/МММ-Оренбург-2021.pdf
- Алынмалардагы ф авазы да п авазына күчә: пурман – фурман, нәпсе – нәфес һ.б. Шулай да, ф авазының кулланылышы шактый актив: филтә/пилтә – фитиль, пирме/фирме – ферма, ышкап/ышкаф – шкаф һ.б. Sebirkhan (talk) 13:43, 21 June 2025 (UTC)
- They are mentioned (not “used’) on p. 73 in the chapter ТЕЛЕН БЕЛГӘН – ТАРИХЫН ДА БЕЛЕР:
- Алынмалардагы ф авазы да п авазына күчә: пурман – фурман, нәпсе – нәфес һ.б. Шулай да, ф авазының кулланылышы шактый актив: филтә/пилтә – фитиль, пирме/фирме – ферма, ышкап/ышкаф – шкаф һ.б
- The context is a discussion of how pronunciations characteristic of the ancient Turkic language are preserved in dialects. ‑‑Lambiam 16:36, 21 June 2025 (UTC)
- ok, we can move it to (sty) - siberian tatar Sebirkhan (talk) 20:10, 21 June 2025 (UTC)
RFV-resolved: moved to Siberian Tatar. —Fish bowl (talk) 02:43, 2 December 2025 (UTC)
Esperanto. Rfv-sense: "to be a spectator"
This definition was merged with the other definitions (to spectate, to watch). I moved the sense into its own definition as it seems to be an intransitive verb. ReVo and PIV do not indicate that it is defined as "to be a spectator". Please let me know if there is a more proper way to handle this type of scenario. TranqyPoo (talk) 00:20, 21 June 2025 (UTC)
Russian. Vininn126 (talk) 13:03, 26 June 2025 (UTC)
Balinese. Rentangan (talk, contribs) 01:13, 30 June 2025 (UTC)
Ukrainian 1928–1933 spelling of є́вро (jévro, “euro”), i.e. the currency symbolised by €. That currency didn't come into existence until sixty-six years after 1933. 0DF (talk) 21:29, 30 June 2025 (UTC)
- RFV failed? 0DF (talk) 01:34, 13 August 2025 (UTC)
RFV-Failed — entry deleted. 0DF (talk) 02:14, 18 September 2025 (UTC)
July 2025
[edit]Erzya. Tagged, not listed. Also for some reason all the senses were just removed (still accessible in the history). Thadh (talk) 10:19, 1 July 2025 (UTC)
- @Mitronen, did you intentionally remove all the senses back in March 2024, or was it an accident? —Mahāgaja · talk 10:59, 1 July 2025 (UTC)
- I did it intentionally, they don't make any sense. Mitronen (talk) 21:26, 1 July 2025 (UTC)
- @Mitronen: But leaving it with no definition at all is hardly useful. What would you say it means? —Mahāgaja · talk 06:30, 2 July 2025 (UTC)
- That's the problem. It doesn't mean anything, although it serves as the root of words like чапамо 'sour', чапакс 'dough'. According to Paasonen, it can mean the same as чапо 'зарубка', 'incision, notch' in some "a-dialects". Maybe we could add this meaning. Mitronen (talk) 06:54, 2 July 2025 (UTC)
- @Mitronen: But leaving it with no definition at all is hardly useful. What would you say it means? —Mahāgaja · talk 06:30, 2 July 2025 (UTC)
- I did it intentionally, they don't make any sense. Mitronen (talk) 21:26, 1 July 2025 (UTC)
Balinese. Etymology 2. Rentangan (talk, contribs) 03:06, 2 July 2025 (UTC)
Balinese. Etymology 3. Rentangan (talk, contribs) 05:56, 2 July 2025 (UTC)
Czech. Just a collocation. Should we include this? Same user create the term in several languages. Thanks!!! Woo19921206woo19921206 (talk) 08:43, 2 July 2025 (UTC)
- Including English passport number. However, the place to discuss possible sum-of-parts entries is WT:RFD, not here. This is the place to discuss whether a term exists, not whether it's SOP. —Mahāgaja · talk 08:57, 2 July 2025 (UTC)
- Hi, sorry, I am new here, thank you for reminding, I put the entry under rfd but the fellow think I am vandalising. How should I move the thread?? Woo19921206woo19921206 (talk) 09:01, 2 July 2025 (UTC)
- I doubt anyone will think you're vandalizing. Just start a new thread there; ideally for both English passport number and číslo pasu. —Mahāgaja · talk 12:21, 3 July 2025 (UTC)
- Hi, sorry, I am new here, thank you for reminding, I put the entry under rfd but the fellow think I am vandalising. How should I move the thread?? Woo19921206woo19921206 (talk) 09:01, 2 July 2025 (UTC)
Balinese. Rentangan (talk, contribs) 21:44, 2 July 2025 (UTC)
Malay. Kamus Dewan labels this with Jw (Jawa = Javanese). Rentangan (talk, contribs) 01:25, 4 July 2025 (UTC)
Indonesian. Rentangan (talk, contribs) 01:40, 6 July 2025 (UTC)
Indonesian. Rentangan (talk, contribs) 01:43, 6 July 2025 (UTC)
Albanian. Is it a regional term? 9 Hits on Google. Chihunglu83 (talk) 13:30, 6 July 2025 (UTC)
Albanian. Chihunglu83 (talk) 14:07, 6 July 2025 (UTC)
Albanian. Unsourced.Chihunglu83 (talk) 14:14, 6 July 2025 (UTC)
Ottoman Turkish. — This unsigned comment was added by Bartanaqa (talk • contribs).
- At first glance in Google Books, used in dictionaries and encyclopedias. There is not yet a policy on which (if any) such works count towards CFI. This may take a while. To start, do you accept the top four lines of page ۲۲ in Gizli lisan?[197] Vox Sciurorum (talk) 19:48, 25 July 2025 (UTC)
- One reason I'm doubtful is the phrase قزلجق آغاجی و چیچكی (kızılcık ağacı ve çiçeği, cornel tree and flower) which suggests the tree word is just a sum of parts. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 19:19, 26 July 2025 (UTC)
- I'm just seeing this, but even if the word does exist, it is obviously sum of parts. I think we can send this to RFD because it seems the creator couldn't find dictionaries listing the word kızılcık with the plant sense, even though it seems to be used for both. Bartanaqa (talk) 19:03, 22 August 2025 (UTC)
- Also bear in mind that in French the fruit and the tree are different words: cornouille vs. cornouiller, which says more about the way French handles fruit names than about Ottoman Turkish. It might be a good idea to check other fruit-related terms to see if there are any other SOP ones resulting from this (I believe French is also one of the languages that have different terms for groups of plants/trees growing together). Chuck Entz (talk) 22:55, 22 August 2025 (UTC)
- I'm just seeing this, but even if the word does exist, it is obviously sum of parts. I think we can send this to RFD because it seems the creator couldn't find dictionaries listing the word kızılcık with the plant sense, even though it seems to be used for both. Bartanaqa (talk) 19:03, 22 August 2025 (UTC)
- One reason I'm doubtful is the phrase قزلجق آغاجی و چیچكی (kızılcık ağacı ve çiçeği, cornel tree and flower) which suggests the tree word is just a sum of parts. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 19:19, 26 July 2025 (UTC)
Albanian. Chihunglu83 (talk) 06:35, 7 July 2025 (UTC)
Albanian. Unsourced Chihunglu83 (talk) 06:37, 7 July 2025 (UTC)
Albanian. Created ten years ago and unsourced. Chihunglu83 (talk) 06:37, 7 July 2025 (UTC)
Delete. Only available source is a Google Book that likely data scraped or maybe did programmatically mixing affixes with some words but the combination of affix-root does not exist and never used at all. One also haven't heard of this, according to talk section. ingeniousness or ingenuity would usually be katalinuhan or kahenyuhan. 𝄽 ysrael214 (talk) 14:38, 10 July 2025 (UTC)
Serbo-Croatian. Defined as a surname, apparently misinterpreted from a Romanian place name in the quote. Ultimateria (talk) 16:48, 11 July 2025 (UTC)
Old High German. OHG and MHG seem unattested, and only reconstructed from Latin Garwilus (from Corvey, so possibly borrowed from Old Saxon or Old Dutch, not High German). appears to be misinformation from a Belarusian source aiming to de-legitimize Lithuanian identity.
Old English. Rfv-sense: "to confound, astonish, stupefy". Probably a erroneous retrojection of the semantics of Middle English stonen, stoneyen (“to stun, stupefy”) and modern English stun given the absence of such a sense Bosworth-Toller and the OED's statement that the sense of stonen/stun "differs essentially" from that of stunian in rejecting the derivation of the former from the latter, which would be nonsensical if stunian (“to confound, astonish, stupefy”) really existed. Hazarasp (parlement · werkis) 10:51, 14 July 2025 (UTC)
Doesn't seem to exist in Sanskrit. Created by new user @డా. గన్నవరపు నరసింహమూర్తి Exarchus (talk) 19:19, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
Old English, “meeting” sense; see Reconstruction:Old English/mot (created by @Hundwine). This came to my attention when it was noted on the talk page on 14 July that “there are two separate words conflated under OE mōt”. The sense was added on 11 October 2024 by Vergencescattered, who did not reply, hence I am moving it here. J3133 (talk) 18:39, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
- That should be a separate etymology section, if it's attested (which would render the reconstruction moot). Sloppy either way. Chuck Entz (talk) 19:15, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
Georgian. This seems to be nothing more than a misspelling of წინასწარმეტყველურად (c̣inasc̣armeṭq̇velurad). Voltaigne (talk) 22:17, 19 July 2025 (UTC)
Polish. Only Google results seem unrelated. Otherwise appears to be a protologism. Vininn126 (talk) 08:38, 21 July 2025 (UTC)
Has digamma ever been used in modern Greek? We mark it as "archaic, obsolete", so was it an intentional archaism at some point in the past? Theknightwho (talk) 00:07, 22 July 2025 (UTC)
Serbo-Croatian. Claimed to be a slang and probably derogatory term referring to Black people. I would expect to find this all over the Internet but I can find exactly one blog reference [198] which says it's a dialectal term of Crna Trava and South Morava, Serbia, and gives no specific sources or any indication of how pejorative this term is. Unless someone can find citations, I'm gonna nuke it. Benwing2 (talk) 06:40, 22 July 2025 (UTC)
Polish. Rfv-sense: An immigrant, especially from Africa or the Middle East.
Appears to be either a hot-word or use by an individual person. Current quote is not durable. Vininn126 (talk) 06:02, 23 July 2025 (UTC)
- For what it's worth, I've heard it used in colloquial, pejoratively, for at least a year. Will quote, when I come across it again. Darellur (talk) 18:08, 6 December 2025 (UTC)
Serbo-Croatian. We have a bunch of random obsolete spelling entries. nohti isn't even a lemma, created 12 years ago by an IP whose entire set of 229 contributions consist almost completely in creating obsolete spelling entries. None of them are cited; I am wont to delete all of them unless they can be cited. Benwing2 (talk) 06:35, 24 July 2025 (UTC)
- Here is the full list:
- oral (obs sp of orao)
otalready deleted- nuždno
- zebsti
- vezti
- viediti (strangely given as "obsolete form of znati")
- viedieti
- vz
- v (one definition, "obsolete form of u")
rysalready deleted- žlt
- blied
- zal
tichalready deleted- sviež
- sliep
- piešak
- dieti
- vieno
uchoalready deleted- siedieti
- morje
- myš
- miesec
- mach
prachalready deleted- prdieti
- snieg
- dym
- trije
vyalready deletedtyalready deletedmyalready deleted- nič (one definition, "obsolete form of ništa")
cyclopsalready deletedencyclopaediaalready deletedamnesiaalready deleted- siena
- sdaj
- nedielja
- srieda
- vtorak
- ponedieljak
rdečalready deleted- čtanje
- čtiti
- čtovanje
- čtovati
- čto
- hlubina (strangely given as "obsolete form of dubina")
- siečanj
- lažujak
- vdovica
- vnuk
- pobieda
themaalready deletedrhythmalready deleted- theatr (this one has "archaic spelling of teatar"")
architecturaalready deleted- tries
- vehnuti (this one has "archaic form of venuti")
- plt
- žlna
heroialready deleted- vitežski
- angel (one definition, "obsolete form of anđel")
- nohti
slzaalready deleted- dlg
vlnaalready deleted- vlk
- slnce
- čtivo
- kruch
- chlieb
- besieda
- sdrav
- vienčanje
scholaalready deleted- medja
- dći
- vriemenski
- pietje
- razprava
- odtvoriti
- mysliti
- smiešiti
- smiešak
- viesti
- viest
- cviet
- chtieti
- hruška
- listje
- grobje (one definition)
- mužski
- vse (one definition)
- kto
- svetčanost
- sladko
mythologiaalready deleted- biel
- bieljeti
- srdčba
- cieć
- sbog
- dielovanje
- črv (one definition, "obsolete form of crv")
- nikdar
- niem
- divjina
- mudroslovje (defined as "(archaic, Croatia) philosophy")
philosophiaalready deleted- težko
- niem
- razsieći
- poviestni
- rastlinje
gymnasiaalready deleted- črven
- črn (defined as "(regional, obsolete) alternative form of cȓn")
- spievati
- spiev
- izpisati
- bezsmrtnost
- piesničstvo
- bytje
- bratja
- razpad
nymphaalready deleted- vojskovodja
- rodjenje
- upati
- upanje
- svoboda (defined as "(obsolete) freedom")
- byti
muchaalready deletedduchalready deleted- chotienje
- vietar
- smiech
- jezyk
synalready deleted- niežnost
- tieme
- izpit
- iztok
- dievojka
- detčko
- poviest
- sbirka
- sbor
- popievka (defined as "obsolete spelling of [red-link] popijevka")
- istba
- died
- rieka
- kdie
- viečnost
- poslie
- bies
- lies
- človiek
- prolietje
- liepo
- miesto
- dielo
- Note that in many of them the non-obsolete lemma is a red link; I gave one example above, popijevka. I have removed all the cases that had citations; none of the above have any citations. Benwing2 (talk) 08:06, 24 July 2025 (UTC)
- @Benwing2: ie instead of je is normal in mid-19th-century books though; the same goes for not expressing assimilation to s, as in zebsti for zepsti: you also wrote srbski instead of srpski. Modern editions – as on Wikisource – may normalize these spellings, similar to post-1918 Russian editions of 19th-century classics, so even the cases where obsolete forms like človjek are cited may in fact be človiek, often depending on whoever digitized and/or transcribed the now niche text first. I frankly don't see anything suspicious at all within this mass, this is not conlanging or something. Fay Freak (talk) 17:12, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
Serbo-Croatian. Chihunglu83 (talk) 14:31, 25 July 2025 (UTC)
Persian. Seems like purist coinage. Saam-andar (talk) 15:55, 26 July 2025 (UTC)
Ancient Greek.
In English, smooth breathing refers to the phenomenon (i.e. a lack of aspiration on a vowel), and to the diacritic which indicates this. Was this actually the case in Ancient Greek? ψιλή (psilḗ) and ψιλή προσῳδία (psilḗ prosōidía) would have certainly been used for the diacritic, so would it really have made sense for ψιλὸν πνεῦμα (psilòn pneûma) to have taken on that meaning as well? It's confusing enough to use smooth breathing for bth in English, but there's also no other English term. Theknightwho (talk) 18:20, 26 July 2025 (UTC)
Esperanto. I cannot find any attestation using Tekstaro for this term, even though I am able to find attestation for jodo. TranqyPoo (talk) 18:23, 26 July 2025 (UTC)
Malay. Note that pitu failed rfv. Rentangan (talk, contribs) 00:16, 29 July 2025 (UTC)
Malay. telu is only attested in Old Malay. Rentangan (talk, contribs) 22:03, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
Malay. Note that pitu failed RFV. Rentangan (talk, contribs) 22:07, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
Malay. telu is only attested in Old Malay. Rentangan (talk, contribs) 22:16, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
Malay. Note that pitu failed RFV. Rentangan (talk, contribs) 22:18, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
Malay. Rentangan (talk, contribs) 22:27, 30 July 2025 (UTC)
Old Saxon. “Source, "Vorwort": ".. altniederdeutschen Eigennamen .. aus verschiedenen Teilen Niederdeutschlands, aus dem fränkischen, sächsischen und friesischen Gebiete stammen", i.e. containing proper names from Old Low Franconian, Old Saxon and Old Frisian.”
doesn't look like this was added when the tag was placed by someone on the entry
for verification see https://www.dmgh.de/mgh_dd_arn/index.htm#page/78/mode/1up
which has Adalger where the wikipedia entry for one of the villages in Saxony has Adalgar
the corrected reference cites records for Werden Abbey
August 2025
[edit]Indonesian regional terms
[edit]- amaruwa
- bokurai
- mendersip
- diye
- karees
- iria
- talalahu
- loloi
- sutlung
- astacala
- kamanai
- samaritu
- tubin
- cekelong
- bisak
- kamirawaan
- biyodu
- liyus
- bimbin
- babahak
- becih
- ponot
- calobak
- ululita
Indonesian. These were all added based only on KBBI. See also WT:AID#Regional languages. Rentangan (talk, contribs) 02:33, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
- Tagging @User:Manggisjeruk, @User:DDG9912 and @User:Sponge2490 for comments. Rentangan (talk, contribs) 03:03, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
- @Rentangan: Most of these terms, despite being used as article names on Indonesian Wikipedia, are most likely dialectal since they derive from regional languages in Indonesia. Therefore, such terms are only used in some regions (and their usage remains uncommon elsewhere — similar to neologisms). Again, the actual reason behind their inclusion by KBBI is popularisation, but this does not necessarily mean that they began to be commonly used by the general population. DDG9912 03:26, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
- Are these terms actually used in Indonesian? I suspect they were simply added for popularization without any real attestation in the Indonesian language context, unlike for example mbak or prengus, or atleast kucit. Rentangan (talk, contribs) 03:41, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
- These terms are not attested, though I've seen bokurai, tubin, and kamirawaan. From what I've seen, most of the time, kamirawaan is used by those who live in South Kalimantan, which kind of proves what DDG9912 just said. For bokurai, it only seems to appear in a bunch of Twitter posts that are referencing another tweet from the Indonesian Wikipedia account. I only see one instance of bokurai being used outside of Twitter/Wikipedia and it was added a few weeks ago, possibly someone who just learned the term from the aforementioned tweet. Sponge2490 (talk) 00:36, 4 August 2025 (UTC)
- Thank you! I will follow your way at finding usages of these terms (and also save some of them if possible). Rentangan (talk, contribs) 01:13, 4 August 2025 (UTC)
- Many of these (including palum which seems to have received significantly far more coverage than the rest) are not yet attestable, at least not in an Indonesian context. Even instances of bokurai cited by @Sponge2490 are mostly mentions, not use, as they do not convey meaning by themselves.
- At most they are dialectal, but I also doubt this is true for all of them, since sometimes these terms are not even widely used (at least not in the meaning suggested by KBBI) in their languages of origin. For example, as a Palembang native speaker, I know for sure that while KBBI lists senantu (“several days ago”) as a Plb (Palembang) "borrowing", it is simply a rare syncopic form of sarénantu with the actual meaning quite different from the one recorded in KBBI ("once, a long time ago"). Same goes for selumbari, which is defined as "the day before yesterday" in KBBI but is actually recorded (as salumbari) with the meaning of "the other day" or "several days ago" (not specifically D-2) in Minangkabau dictionaries.
- Often these terms are also listed with different POS than in their languages of origin. To take bokurai as an example, instead of a noun, it is quite transparently a verbal/adjectival form, i.e., upper Riau Malay/eastern Minangkabau bo- (= Standard Malay ber-) + kurai. A native speaker of that dialect explained the term to me as "to be root-like, to have the quality of a root" (?), and added that it is used rather generally, not specific to describing crepuscular rays.
- To add more to the confusion, sometimes KBBI will also prioritize including these rare "unique" definitions over recording actual use of the terms, to the point that e.g. their entry for kimak only has the Lun Dayeh-origin "gerakan mulut ketika bergumam atau mengomel" as a gloss instead of the more widely used derogatory meaning recorded in our entry for kimak. Swarabakti (talk) 16:42, 6 August 2025 (UTC)
- As an addendum, introducing neologisms and learned borrowings from regional languages as alternatives to foreignisms is not a novel practice in the history of Indonesian language policy. But this does not necessitate directly including them in KBBI; in fact, it might be counterproductive as the term might not be readily accepted by speakers. If you want, publish them in glossaries (which TBF Badan Bahasa already does via the works of Komisi Istilah, the PASTI website, etc.) and popularize their use in media, literature, etc. first before recording them in KBBI.
- Good examples of this practice are the introduction of santai and mantan, both of which were first popularized via mass media, literature, and popular culture (including this iconic song from Bang Haji) before they were included in KBBI. Of course, not all proposed terms will be accepted by speakers, and some foreignisms may persist, but this is true for any living language with an active community. If anything, the non-adoption of these terms give opportunity for more alternatives to emerge, which may end up enriching the language even further.
- On a more cynical note, I personally abhor the exploitative undertone in our language regulator's use of indigenous languages merely as source for "lexically enriching" (memperkaya kosakata) the national language. It does more harm than good to these languages, which are already heavily underresourced. "Documenting" their words by putting them in a dictionary for a language that is predatory to them is peak linguistic appropriation, and does next-to-nothing to preserve and promote the usage of these languages. Swarabakti (talk) 17:47, 6 August 2025 (UTC)
- Yes, I agree with you. I think KBBI should only include terms from regional languages if they're really attested in Indonesian language context. And similarly, I think these languages deserve their own dictionary instead of their terms lumped together in one dictionary for an official language. I also found similar mistakes that you mentioned, for example they somehow mark "indak", "urang" and "palasik" as nonstandard even though it's clear that they're probably from Minangkabau. And similarly (again) they created the "Minangkabau" (Mk) definition of "bahasa" as "kata yang digunakan untuk menghubungkan bagian ujaran", but I'm quite sure that it's actually a typo of "bahawa" since the distance between "s" and "w" is quite close in the keyboard. Rentangan (talk, contribs) 04:08, 11 August 2025 (UTC)
- That (Mk) sense for "bahasa" may actually be valid, though, since both "language" and "that (connecting a noun clause)" in Minang are baso. Swarabakti (talk) 17:21, 12 August 2025 (UTC)
- Ah, yea, after checking MCP, I found quite a significant number of examples of bahasa in this sense in documents by Minangkabau authors. (You can limit the search to Minangkabau-flavored works such as Asal Keturunan Raja Barus and Tambo Barus Hilir.) Swarabakti (talk) 17:42, 12 August 2025 (UTC)
- Yes, I agree with you. I think KBBI should only include terms from regional languages if they're really attested in Indonesian language context. And similarly, I think these languages deserve their own dictionary instead of their terms lumped together in one dictionary for an official language. I also found similar mistakes that you mentioned, for example they somehow mark "indak", "urang" and "palasik" as nonstandard even though it's clear that they're probably from Minangkabau. And similarly (again) they created the "Minangkabau" (Mk) definition of "bahasa" as "kata yang digunakan untuk menghubungkan bagian ujaran", but I'm quite sure that it's actually a typo of "bahawa" since the distance between "s" and "w" is quite close in the keyboard. Rentangan (talk, contribs) 04:08, 11 August 2025 (UTC)
- These terms are not attested, though I've seen bokurai, tubin, and kamirawaan. From what I've seen, most of the time, kamirawaan is used by those who live in South Kalimantan, which kind of proves what DDG9912 just said. For bokurai, it only seems to appear in a bunch of Twitter posts that are referencing another tweet from the Indonesian Wikipedia account. I only see one instance of bokurai being used outside of Twitter/Wikipedia and it was added a few weeks ago, possibly someone who just learned the term from the aforementioned tweet. Sponge2490 (talk) 00:36, 4 August 2025 (UTC)
- Are these terms actually used in Indonesian? I suspect they were simply added for popularization without any real attestation in the Indonesian language context, unlike for example mbak or prengus, or atleast kucit. Rentangan (talk, contribs) 03:41, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
- @Rentangan: Most of these terms, despite being used as article names on Indonesian Wikipedia, are most likely dialectal since they derive from regional languages in Indonesia. Therefore, such terms are only used in some regions (and their usage remains uncommon elsewhere — similar to neologisms). Again, the actual reason behind their inclusion by KBBI is popularisation, but this does not necessarily mean that they began to be commonly used by the general population. DDG9912 03:26, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
Albanian. Regional term? Chihunglu83 (talk) 07:06, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
Ancient Greek. Rfv-sense: "thorn, spine, prickle". Added by an editor who doesn't seem to have any idea what they are doing. — SURJECTION / T / C / L / 14:18, 3 August 2025 (UTC)
- Yeah, I think the editor is confusing it with ἄκανθα (ákantha). —Mahāgaja · talk 06:46, 4 August 2025 (UTC)
- Or the editor is plausibly, if erroneously, reasoning that there must be Greek and Latin etyma of the forms entered for the botanical combining form acantho- and acanthus#English. DCDuring (talk) 13:47, 4 August 2025 (UTC)
Vietnamese. Rfv-sense: commune of Hiệp Đức district, Quảng Nam Province. Can’t find any evidence that this ever existed. (I did find evidence that the administrative divisions of the area have undergone a gazillion changes over time, though, so anything’s possible.) MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 03:24, 4 August 2025 (UTC)
- @Mxn, it seems you added this. Do you remember where you found this? MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 08:49, 25 September 2025 (UTC)
German. Abbreviation for "Post-Avatar depressions syndrom".
I added one use in Bedeutung Online from January 2023, and have found "Post-Avatar-Depressions-Syndrom" but not PADS in RTL from December 2022. That's all I could find. Can anyone find use of the abbreviation in German? Cnilep (talk) 06:36, 5 August 2025 (UTC)
RFV failed. Cnilep (talk) 05:35, 6 November 2025 (UTC)
Ottoman Turkish. Rfv-sense: physical violence, as opposed to harsh words or emotional abuse. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 18:27, 7 August 2025 (UTC)
- RFV-failed Bartanaqa (talk) 18:24, 15 October 2025 (UTC)
Avestan. {{R:EWAia|page=62|vol=1}} says 'aðāiti' is to be interpreted otherwise (from what Bartholomae gives: as a noun "not-giving"). No mention of this in either {{R:ira:Cheung}} or {{R:inc:IAIL}}. Exarchus (talk) 08:31, 8 August 2025 (UTC)
- Now I see that the addenda to LIV give 'āθa' as possibly the perfect of this root. Exarchus (talk) 08:49, 8 August 2025 (UTC)
Polish. Can we find early usage of this expression, likely (possibly?) the source of not my circus, not my monkeys. DCDuring (talk) 19:26, 10 August 2025 (UTC)
{{R:pl:NKJP}}is currently down, but I fixed the link to WSJP, which has plenty of usage examples, take your pick. Vininn126 (talk) 09:23, 11 August 2025 (UTC)- @DCDuring I have cited the entry as per CFI. If you wish to RFV the etymology, please do that, instead of asking for verification of the whole entry. I'm marking this as closed. Vininn126 (talk) 21:09, 11 August 2025 (UTC)
- RFV-cited. If any doubts as to the date of the etymology are still present, it should be handled best in the WT:Tea room. Vininn126 (talk) 21:11, 11 August 2025 (UTC)
- The 1996 cite supports it preceding the English version, which my sister uses constantly and annoyingly. Poland has a lot to answer for. DCDuring (talk) 23:09, 11 August 2025 (UTC)
Fwe. Converting from speedy deletion request by @YeBoy371, who said Not sure if this word exists
. — Polomo ⟨ oi! ⟩ · 00:44, 11 August 2025 (UTC)
- Keep - @Polomo @YeBoy371 this word does exist. Check page 128 of the entry reference. Penyuwangi (talk) 08:25, 18 November 2025 (UTC)
Esperanto. Only found one use in Tekstaro. ReVo and PIV do not have entries for this term. TranqyPoo (talk) 22:44, 16 August 2025 (UTC)
Yiddish. I don't know where they get "yolde" from. No such attested thing in CEYD, the Belarusian dictionary, or the Dutch dictionary. The closest things I found were יולדת (yoldes, “woman in childbirth”) and יאָלד (yold, “fool, sucker”), but a) I can't see how either of those connect to the purported name for this tree and b) neither of them are in the specific form as named in this entry. — This unsigned comment was added by Insaneguy1083 (talk • contribs).
- @Insaneguy1083 This is just a misspelling of יאָדלע (yodle), but I would still like a reference for חן־יאָדלע (kheyn-yodle). Thadh (talk) 16:49, 12 October 2025 (UTC)
- @Thadh: done. Albeit on my old account (Insaneguy1083) because this new one doesn't have perms yet. Dijacz (talk) 05:01, 8 November 2025 (UTC)
Esperanto for "shotgun". —Granger (talk · contribs) 02:22, 15 August 2025 (UTC)
- I searched for kartoĉa and found no relevant matches in Tekstaro, Internet Archive, and eo.wikisource. TranqyPoo (talk) 15:11, 25 October 2025 (UTC)
RFV for the sense fool, idiot, etc. MurjhayaAanch (talk) 06:55, 15 August 2025 (UTC)
- @MurjhayaAanch: This is very frequently used in spoken colloquial Hindi, although I'm not able to find quotations from literature right now. I've added 3 quotation from social media at the entry where this is easily citable. You could take a look at google:"अबे चमन" site:x.com, google:"अबे चमन" site:instagram.com, google:"अबे ओ चमन" site:x.com, google:"साला चमन" site:x.com, google:"अबे चमन तू" site:facebook.com, etc. – Svārtava (tɕ) 16:50, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
- I guess then that settles it. MurjhayaAanch (talk) 16:11, 25 October 2025 (UTC)
Esperanto. Rfv-sense: cookie
No entries in ReVo or PIV. Currently, my skill level is too low to distinguish between cupcake and cookie in a quotation. It is difficult to believe this RFV'd sense as (1) its etymology does not seemingly indicate so and (2) it would require an excessive amount of context to distinguish between the 2 senses. TranqyPoo (talk) 22:44, 16 August 2025 (UTC)
Esperanto for "traitor". I've only ever seen perfidulo for this meaning. The etymology is amusing, but searches on Google Books, Tekstaro, and Project Gutenberg turned up nothing. —Granger (talk · contribs) 13:59, 17 August 2025 (UTC)
- Also found nothing on Internet Archive, eo.wikisource; nor are there entries in ReVo and PIV. TranqyPoo (talk) 17:10, 24 October 2025 (UTC)
This certainly exists in Hindi, but can attestations be found for Sanskrit? Exarchus (talk) 17:50, 17 August 2025 (UTC)
- Same thing for तदुपरान्त (taduparānta). Exarchus (talk) 18:53, 17 August 2025 (UTC)
- RFV-failed. – Svārtava (tɕ) 15:12, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
- @Svartava Can you also correct the etymology at उपरांत? (I'm not sure what it should be) Exarchus (talk) 15:52, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
Done -- not sure about the etymology either, but added a possible one from {{R:hi:Dasa}}reference. – Svārtava (tɕ) 16:02, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
- @Svartava Can you also correct the etymology at उपरांत? (I'm not sure what it should be) Exarchus (talk) 15:52, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
![[22]](https://static.daktilo.com/sites/71/uploads/2018/08/11/milyoner.jpg){kind=link}
![[196]](https://www.shutterstock.com/shutterstock/photos/2495650967/display_1500/stock-photo-deaf-alphabet-letter-love-by-hand-the-letter-love-in-sign-language-isolated-on-a-white-2495650967.jpg){kind=link}
mother-of-pearl#Translations ("pearly layer"): Tatar пәрәмәч
[edit]* Tatar: {{t+|tt|пәрәмәч}}
https://suzlek.antat.ru/ only records senses of "meat pie", etc. @Atitarev (https://en.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=mother-of-pearl&diff=prev&oldid=58088052) —Fish bowl (talk) 04:41, 18 August 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks, @Fish bowl. Fixed in diff. Anatoli T. (обсудить/вклад) 02:05, 20 August 2025 (UTC)
Rfv for both noun and adjective in Sanskrit. Exarchus (talk) 15:25, 18 August 2025 (UTC)
Livonian. Added by @Mulder1982. — SURJECTION / T / C / L / 13:57, 20 August 2025 (UTC)
- RFV-deleted — SURJECTION / T / C / L / 19:57, 21 September 2025 (UTC)
Livonian. This word is mentioned in Sjögren, but as an Estonian word, not a Livonian one. — SURJECTION / T / C / L / 13:59, 20 August 2025 (UTC)
- Speedied - I double-checked Sjögren and checked LDW and SLW; none of them have this as a Livonian word. It was also added by Rajkiandris, who was known for careless editing. — SURJECTION / T / C / L / 22:51, 27 August 2025 (UTC)
Malay. Rfv-sense: "dimness of vision." Only attested in Wilkinson (1932), which copied most of its Batavian entries from Von de Wall (1877-1884) and simply translated their Dutch glosses to English (sometimes inaccurately). This particular sense seems to be a mistranslation (?) of Von de Wall's gloss "Naauwkeurig zien of duidelijk zigtbaar", which in turn is copied from Batten (1868, an exclusively Batavian Malay dictionary), cf. the Betawi entry in the same page above the Malay entry. In any case the Betawi sense is not used in general Malay context, not even in Jakarta Indonesian. Swarabakti (talk) 04:36, 22 August 2025 (UTC)
Translingual. Sense 1 (“to smell”) was tagged by Kwamikagami on 2 March 2023 but not listed. Sense 2 (“(Internet slang, derogatory) Jewish people”) was removed by 192.223.122.241 today with the edit summary, “No sources back the alleged 2nd definition”. J3133 (talk) 04:47, 22 August 2025 (UTC)
Turkish. Rfv-senses: puffiness, thickening Bartanaqa (talk) 18:53, 22 August 2025 (UTC)
- I think "swelling" would be a good replacement for the two tagged senses. It seems easily citable. See: Uzmanından bilek şişliği olan anne adaylarına uyarılar in Cumhuriyet. Vox Sciurorum (talk) 18:53, 27 August 2025 (UTC)
- The term “thickening” is too polysemic; my first association is with the treatment of a sauce that is too thin, and then figuratively of a plot. While “swelling” is a generally usable term and often the best translation (e.g. in bacak şişliği or eklem şişliği), in some contexts one can IMO also translate this as “puffiness” or “bloating”, as in the question, “Karın şişliği neden olur?”[199] It is used there as a synonym of şişkinlik.
Tarifit. Tagged for speedy by Lankdadank (talk • contribs) with the comment "I cannot find this term mentioned in any of the Tarifit sources available. I have personally never heard of it either. Check out "Dictionnaire tarifif-français" by Mohammed Serhoual and "Dictionnaire rifain-français illustré: Le parler d’Ayt Weryaghel (Rif central) Maroc" by Jamâl Abarrou. Ařef in comparison is the term given for "thousand" in those." Originally added by Ajellid-n-arif (talk • contribs). — SURJECTION / T / C / L / 21:15, 25 August 2025 (UTC)
- Thank you for redirecting me here! I have no reason to assume that @Ajellid-n-arif came up with this term himself since he has contributed the most to adding Tarifit entries, so if he could verify this entry, that would be great. Lankdadank (talk) 21:58, 25 August 2025 (UTC)
- This is mistake on my part, it seems that this term is primarily used by (some) of the Riffian immigrant community of the Netherlands. It is an adaption of the word "Duizend", where "Duiz-", phonologically adapted to "ṭawez". It is not widespread, so it's okay to delete. — AjellidnArif (talk) 10:33, 19 October 2025 (UTC)
- Hi, thanks for replying and clarifying. I wouldn't oppose keeping this term if it's used. Of course, if we could find a source for it, that would be great, but it's hard for less documented languages like Tarifit. Lankdadank (talk) 10:47, 19 October 2025 (UTC)
- This is mistake on my part, it seems that this term is primarily used by (some) of the Riffian immigrant community of the Netherlands. It is an adaption of the word "Duizend", where "Duiz-", phonologically adapted to "ṭawez". It is not widespread, so it's okay to delete. — AjellidnArif (talk) 10:33, 19 October 2025 (UTC)
Persian. Saam-andar (talk) 15:31, 27 August 2025 (UTC)
I can't seem to find any sources online that mention this word. The editor that added it has shown a tendency of mistaken edits, too. Pitocuev42 (talk) 23:58, 31 August 2025 (UTC)
September 2025
[edit]Old East Slavic. Also the altform. Thadh (talk) 14:35, 2 September 2025 (UTC)
- RFV-failed Bartanaqa (talk) 21:10, 8 November 2025 (UTC)
Classical Mandaic. Added by a now blocked user; can't find this spelling in the usual sources. Saam-andar (talk) 17:29, 3 September 2025 (UTC)
Another Old Tupi word coined by Lukenji. I could only find it in Nheengatu, as kandirú. Trooper57 (talk) 00:22, 28 July 2025 (UTC)
- RFD failed. Trooper57 (talk) 21:26, 3 September 2025 (UTC)
- Why did you tag this for RfD and not RfV? — Polomo ⟨ oi! ⟩ · 00:39, 5 September 2025 (UTC)
- Discussion moved from WT:RFDN#kandiru.
- Moving from RfD to close. I don’t see benefit to, e.g., waiting one more month, seeing as a user has already looked and found nothing. If anyone does find anything, they can request recreation. — Polomo ⟨ oi! ⟩ · 01:17, 5 September 2025 (UTC)
German. Sounds familiar and plausible, but it's tricky to find quotations for it. Jberkel 20:58, 8 September 2025 (UTC)
- Ballsperre seems to be a very rare word. I found some results on Google. No results found in DWDS-Korpusbelege in many corpi. In WT:ADE, it has mentioned that,
- Semantically predictable closed compounds are also included as articles in other languages, including English: coalmine, headache, schoolteacher etc. Moreover, affixed constructions like chlorineless or conjugated verb forms are also included.
- But this is too rare on use. It may violate WT:ATTEST. HerrGutmannsWiki (talk) 19:03, 11 September 2025 (UTC)
- I added a couple cites, but it wasn't easy. The DWDS newspaper archive has very occasional hits starting in 1999, but unfortunately it's only searchable for usage graphs and with only 10 words of context, not enough to use (and none of the articles seem to have made it online). Maybe DeReKo has them? It doesn't help that it also occasionally used in other football contexts (blocking a shot, shielding the ball in a way that's allowed). I limited myself to ones that imply a foul of some sort.
- It's an interesting word in that it sounds jargony in a way that (to me) sounds a bit formal, I'd have expected it to be officialized. But instead it seems to be a grassroots term that only occasionally makes it into print in regional sports reporting. PhoenicianLetters (talk) 19:54, 18 November 2025 (UTC)
Serbo-Croatian. Created in 2011 by User:Vorziblix. No non-bot edits since then, not in any dictionary I can find and almost no relevant Google hits; either it's extremely rare, dialectal or nonexistent. Benwing2 (talk) 22:34, 9 September 2025 (UTC)
- It’s in the ARj, volume 3, page 855, which gives a single quote from the 16th century but marks it as a hapax. 68.50.134.29 23:34, 13 October 2025 (UTC)
Old Tupi. Rfv-sense: “3. Guaraci, the Sun personified”.
Navarro doesn't list this sense, and I couldn't find any mention in contemporary sources. Even if it is a thing, it would be a proper noun like Tupã. Trooper57 (talk) 17:01, 11 September 2025 (UTC)
Esperanto. Its current definition states abandonment, but I do not think that is correct. According to ReVo, it is related to a something that is a part of nature. Perhaps naturalness? Tekstaro provides an abundant number of quotes, but I am too inept to accurately decipher its meaning from them. TranqyPoo (talk) 23:04, 11 September 2025 (UTC)
Irish. Listed at {{R:ga:tearma.ie}}, which sometimes coins technical terms rather than listing terms that already exist. I'm not having any luck finding real-world usage. —Mahāgaja · talk 14:12, 12 September 2025 (UTC)
Irish. Again, I can only find this at {{R:ga:tearma.ie}} and sites quoting or mirroring Wiktionary. I haven't found any real-life usage. —Mahāgaja · talk 09:17, 13 September 2025 (UTC)
ard-aire and ard-aireacht
[edit]Two more from tearma.ie. I can't find any real-life usage of these words in the sense 'overlord(ship)', where the second element is aire m (“nobleman”). There is some very slight usage where the second element is aire f (“attention, notice”), but not enough to warrant an entry. —Mahāgaja · talk 16:28, 13 September 2025 (UTC)
Serbo-Croatian. Created by User:Dijan in 2005 (over 20 years ago!) as a "Bosnian" entry, in a really garbagey form. Not in any Serbian or Croatian dictionary I can find. The closest is наде(с)ти listed in RSJ as a variant of наденути, which does have the meaning "to give a name to someone". It also means "to put (clothing, thread, etc.) onto/into someone/something" which might match the given meaning of "to stick on", and it also means "to stuff (food) with something", which doesn't at all match the given meaning of "to impose". Possibly this is a badly edited version of an ikavian variant of наде(с)ти? That's the only thing I can think of but I am tempted to just nuke this unless this specific spelling can be verified with the given meanings. Benwing2 (talk) 05:02, 14 September 2025 (UTC)
Irish. I can't find this spelling anywhere, not even tearma.ie. —Mahāgaja · talk 09:54, 14 September 2025 (UTC)
I can't find this word anywhere, not even tearma.ie. —Mahāgaja · talk 17:28, 14 September 2025 (UTC)
Supposed Sentinelese term. — SURJECTION / T / C / L / 15:07, 15 September 2025 (UTC)
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sentinelese_language — This unsigned comment was added by Atayozgur (talk • contribs) at 15:14, 15 September 2025 (UTC).
- It doesn't seem to have a source either. — SURJECTION / T / C / L / 15:47, 15 September 2025 (UTC)
- Okay, I'm gonna add "supposedly" to the definition. Atayozgur (talk) 16:53, 15 September 2025 (UTC)
- That's not enough. We need evidence that the term actually exists. — SURJECTION / T / C / L / 17:55, 15 September 2025 (UTC)
- Well from what I've seen there's no evidence at all. Atayozgur (talk) 04:29, 16 September 2025 (UTC)
- That's not enough. We need evidence that the term actually exists. — SURJECTION / T / C / L / 17:55, 15 September 2025 (UTC)
- Okay, I'm gonna add "supposedly" to the definition. Atayozgur (talk) 16:53, 15 September 2025 (UTC)
- It doesn't seem to have a source either. — SURJECTION / T / C / L / 15:47, 15 September 2025 (UTC)
Polish. Presented unsourced and not in any dialectal dictionary I know, nor in other more general ones accessible to me. Vininn126 (talk) 04:55, 16 September 2025 (UTC)
- I know that this word isn't in any dictionary. I checked myself because I was curious about it, since it's used in my village. Sometimes on OLX auctions, this word pops up in relation to wood, especially in listings from the areas around Łomża and Zambrów. https://www.olx.pl/d/oferta/deski-drewno-na-opal-palety-kienki-CID628-ID17lnct.html 83.1.96.241 05:21, 16 September 2025 (UTC)
- Please see WT:CFI. Vininn126 (talk) 05:25, 16 September 2025 (UTC)
- Another auction using this word:
- https://www.olx.pl/d/oferta/drzewo-opal-olszyna-sosna-brzoza-dab-s2a-s2b-kloda-pelet-CID628-IDWC494.html
- Do whatever you want with this. 83.1.96.241 06:09, 16 September 2025 (UTC)
- I would sadly say that Olx does not count as "durably archived" as per our CFI. Whether this is evidence of "clearly in wide use", also up for debate. If quotes from print text, for example, could be found, that would be ideal. Vininn126 (talk) 06:28, 16 September 2025 (UTC)
- Doubt I'll find anything else about this word, it's quite rare and, as you can see, not documented. The only thing I managed to find is this: https://gminarybno.pl/upload/2014/przewodnik_przyrodniczo-kulturowy60x240.pdf, but in this case, the word means something else. 83.1.96.241 06:54, 16 September 2025 (UTC)
- I am also unable to find anything on NKJP. Unfortunate. Perhaps soon there will be something, and in the meantime the corresponding Citations page can be started. Vininn126 (talk) 07:16, 16 September 2025 (UTC)
- i found another auction with word "kienki" but this times is around Łódź
- https://www.olx.pl/d/oferta/sprzedam-drzewo-brzoze-w-kierunkach-lub-lupane-z-dowozem-CID628-ID15ukFt.html
- I think is evidence for existing this word. 83.1.247.180 14:14, 17 September 2025 (UTC)
- Again, I don't think this meets either of the two outlined requirements for CFI (which you should please read). 1) Olx is not "durably archived" 2) I don't think a few hits qualifies as "clearly in common use". Vininn126 (talk) 14:22, 17 September 2025 (UTC)
- So, what if I archived the websites on the web archive? Would they still not meet the requirements? 83.1.247.180 14:37, 17 September 2025 (UTC)
- This the subject of much debate on Wiktionary, as far as I remember right now there is a "whitelist" of websites that need additional archiving. I'm not sure archiving alone is enough, fairly sure it's not. Vininn126 (talk) 14:48, 17 September 2025 (UTC)
- So, what if I archived the websites on the web archive? Would they still not meet the requirements? 83.1.247.180 14:37, 17 September 2025 (UTC)
- Again, I don't think this meets either of the two outlined requirements for CFI (which you should please read). 1) Olx is not "durably archived" 2) I don't think a few hits qualifies as "clearly in common use". Vininn126 (talk) 14:22, 17 September 2025 (UTC)
- I am also unable to find anything on NKJP. Unfortunate. Perhaps soon there will be something, and in the meantime the corresponding Citations page can be started. Vininn126 (talk) 07:16, 16 September 2025 (UTC)
- Doubt I'll find anything else about this word, it's quite rare and, as you can see, not documented. The only thing I managed to find is this: https://gminarybno.pl/upload/2014/przewodnik_przyrodniczo-kulturowy60x240.pdf, but in this case, the word means something else. 83.1.96.241 06:54, 16 September 2025 (UTC)
- I would sadly say that Olx does not count as "durably archived" as per our CFI. Whether this is evidence of "clearly in wide use", also up for debate. If quotes from print text, for example, could be found, that would be ideal. Vininn126 (talk) 06:28, 16 September 2025 (UTC)
- Please see WT:CFI. Vininn126 (talk) 05:25, 16 September 2025 (UTC)
Old English. The attested forms I see seem to actually point to onstellan, onstealde/onstald < *stalljan, *stald- in all dialects; I see no sign of a past tense in onstield-/onstyld-/onsteld-.--Urszag (talk) 05:27, 16 September 2025 (UTC)
- RFV-failed; marked with request for move.--Urszag (talk) 01:06, 17 October 2025 (UTC)
Old English. I only see examples of astellan, astealde/astalde.--Urszag (talk) 05:31, 16 September 2025 (UTC)
- RFV-failed; marked with request for move.--Urszag (talk) 01:06, 17 October 2025 (UTC)
Coptic. Rfv-sense: Aramaea/Aramea, added by @Lingo Bingo Dingo Ioaxxere (talk) 02:17, 17 September 2025 (UTC)
Polish. I'd prefer some evidence this isn't just code-switching, and some actual quotes. Vininn126 (talk) 12:29, 18 September 2025 (UTC)
Persian. Looks like an attempt by now blocked user at conecting تیراژه (tīrāža / tirâže) to Sanskrit नीराज् (nīrāj, “illuminate, irradiate”). Saam-andar (talk) 20:01, 18 September 2025 (UTC)
- RFV-failed Bartanaqa (talk) 10:15, 7 November 2025 (UTC)
Polish. Marked as rare, can't actually find uses in the usual places. Plenty of mentions, but no uses. Vininn126 (talk) 05:21, 21 September 2025 (UTC)
Esperanto: rfv-sense for "outdoorsman" and "outlaw". The only citations I can see on Google Books and Tekstaro seem to mean "non-Esperantist". —Granger (talk · contribs) 11:40, 22 September 2025 (UTC)
Indonesian. — SURJECTION / T / C / L / 15:28, 24 September 2025 (UTC)
Vietnamese, another creation by @Minhandsomely. Google gives exactly zilch. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 07:55, 25 September 2025 (UTC)
Vietnamese. Rfv-senses: “nosy; unwelcome” and “afflicted with bad luck”. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 08:01, 25 September 2025 (UTC)
Vietnamese. Rfv-sense: stupid, dim-witted. Has this ever been used outside of Hồ Xuân Hương's poem? It appears there's even disagreement on the actual meaning. MuDavid 栘𩿠 (talk) 03:02, 30 September 2025 (UTC)
October 2025
[edit]Esperanto. Rfv-sense: rare interjection meaning "no". The usual Esperanto word for this is ne. —Granger (talk · contribs) 15:20, 3 October 2025 (UTC)
@Fenakhay requested verification of "Etymology 2" of this word in Moroccan Arabic. I originally heard it with that meaning from people from Oujda (Eastern Morocco). I searched in Boussellam's Moroccan Arabic dictionary, volume 3, and found this entry for ياد (also used in Souss region) whose etymology Boussellam is not very clear on. He cites Spanish "ya", Berber "yad", and Arabic "aydi" or "ayadi", all linked to the same meaning. How should we proceed? Ideophagous (talk) 09:01, 4 October 2025 (UTC)
It is listed as the etymon of English duppy in the Dictionary of Jamaican English, but I couldn't find it (or anything resembling it) in {{R:bvb:Diccionario}}. Santi2222 (talk) 12:49, 6 October 2025 (UTC)
Mizo. Created by @AryamanA in 2017; I can't find it attested to actually mean the East India Company anywhere outside of Lorrain's dictionary; I can only find it as the first element of bawrhsaia be (“okra”). Anyhow, it's also spelled incorrectly (compounds in Mizo are normally written without hyphens). — mellohi! (Goodbye!) 05:20, 7 October 2025 (UTC)
Egyptian. Rfv-sense: Triliteral phonogram for šꜣt. Identified in Gardiner as a biliteral phonogram for šꜣ. is there any reason to prefer the former? anything relevant should probably cited if so, since what we have now contradicts with the only referenced work we have on the page ragweed theater talk, user 13:41, 7 October 2025 (UTC)
Polish. Marked as "potentially individualistic" (i.e. used by one author) by Doroszewski and when checking for quotes it indeed seems to be used only by Juliusz Słowacki. @C.Ezra.M as the creator. Vininn126 (talk) 14:33, 9 October 2025 (UTC)
Yiddish. Thadh (talk) 16:43, 10 October 2025 (UTC)
- I seem to see several uses: in the compound form האַרץ־קראַנקייט (harts-krankeyt) as the title of a book; further e.g. [200], [201], [202]. ‑‑Lambiam 23:53, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Esperanto. Its morphology seems miscreated. I could not find any quotes from: Internet Archive, Tekstaro, Google Books, Google. TranqyPoo (talk) 05:04, 11 October 2025 (UTC)
Yiddish. The spelling makes no sense anyway so I doubt this is controversial. Thadh (talk) 21:43, 11 October 2025 (UTC)
- The standard form is קענגורו (kenguru), so if this is attestable, it should be an
{{alt form}}at any rate. —Mahāgaja · talk 06:17, 15 October 2025 (UTC)
Yiddish. Reposting this because somehow, the last time I posted this, there wasn't any reply button. Insaneguy1083 (talk) 12:18, 12 October 2025 (UTC)
Ancient Greek. Rfv-sense: ‘The act of sealioning.’ 68.50.134.29 18:18, 13 October 2025 (UTC)
- That is so implausible that I’d have simply deleted it outright, as a presumable joke or vandalism. Nicodene (talk) 20:38, 13 October 2025 (UTC)
- @Nicodene: it's a little more complicated: people have done similar things long before the internet was invented, but they weren't call sealioning. It might be simply a matter of replacing the term with a description of what the equivalent behavior would have been in ancient times, or it might be that sealioning is too bound up with the way internet forums work to have a close enough equivalent- I really don't know. The word "sealioning" itself will have to go, of course. Chuck Entz (talk) 21:15, 13 October 2025 (UTC)
- Merriam-Webster describes sealioning as ’a form of trolling meant to exhaust the other debate participant with no intention of real discourse’. I’d be very surprised to find that the Greek word, describing e.g. a favoured tactic of Socrates (to make the other person examine their beliefs), was used to mean trolling-via-exhaustion. Nicodene (talk) 21:36, 13 October 2025 (UTC)
- Per w:Sealioning § Comparisons:
In 2022, English philosopher and academic Sophie Grace Chappell likened sealioning to the Socratic term eirōneíā (from which the word irony is derived but with a different end meaning), which she described as an insincere pretense of ignorance as a way to disassemble an argument, saying "[i]n contemporary internet slang, eironeia is «sealioning»."
So the comparison doesn't originate with whoever added it to our entry. Nevertheless, that doesn't justify listing sealioning as a gloss of εἰρωνεία (eirōneía). —Mahāgaja · talk 07:44, 14 October 2025 (UTC)- It seems she is operating with a broader, or otherwise different, definition of sealioning. Nicodene (talk) 01:16, 15 October 2025 (UTC)
- The sense of the uses in the quotations for this entry does not seem too different from Socrates' feigning of ignorance, except perhaps for a presumed malicious intention of the sea lion. (The person being harassed by the philosopher may not care for this distinction.) ‑‑Lambiam 23:32, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
- It seems she is operating with a broader, or otherwise different, definition of sealioning. Nicodene (talk) 01:16, 15 October 2025 (UTC)
- Per w:Sealioning § Comparisons:
- Merriam-Webster describes sealioning as ’a form of trolling meant to exhaust the other debate participant with no intention of real discourse’. I’d be very surprised to find that the Greek word, describing e.g. a favoured tactic of Socrates (to make the other person examine their beliefs), was used to mean trolling-via-exhaustion. Nicodene (talk) 21:36, 13 October 2025 (UTC)
- @Nicodene: it's a little more complicated: people have done similar things long before the internet was invented, but they weren't call sealioning. It might be simply a matter of replacing the term with a description of what the equivalent behavior would have been in ancient times, or it might be that sealioning is too bound up with the way internet forums work to have a close enough equivalent- I really don't know. The word "sealioning" itself will have to go, of course. Chuck Entz (talk) 21:15, 13 October 2025 (UTC)
Polish. Listed in Słownik warszawski 1900 (see entry) with a symbol marking the entry as Middle Polish, however, without quotes - furthermore no Middle Polish dictionary has any entry nor can I find any quotes in the usual places. Appears to be a ghost word. Vininn126 (talk) 22:05, 13 October 2025 (UTC)
Czech. Rfv-sense: sense 2.
- I completely agree with the additionally provided definition, however I cannot seem to verify how the pastry is directly translated to angel's head? It seems to be a different pastry and I doubt it's a variation, too.
Belarusian, supposedly native doublet of зрок (zrok, “sight”). Almost certainly an reconstruction based on the hypothetical Proto-Slavic form which is not actually used in real-world texts. I can't find it in any texts or in dictionaries (including etymological and dialectal, where you’d expect such forms to be mentioned).
Note that the word form зо́рак (zórak, “of stars”) does occur and is unrelated to this hypothetical *зо́рак (*zórak, “sight”). For example, all the linked mentions in slounik.org [which is mistakenly linked on the page зорак] are actually зо́рак (zórak, “of stars”), not *зо́рак (*zórak, “sight”).
I suggest deleting the current content of зорак and replacing it with {{infl of|be|зо́рка||gen|p}}. Хтосьці (talk) 07:57, 16 October 2025 (UTC)
- Pinging @KamiruPL as the creator of the original article. Хтосьці (talk) 08:01, 16 October 2025 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, I do not recall whether if was sourced, as it was a few of years ago when I created this Belarusian entry. It might have been included in some online dictionary but deleted since. Feel free to replace it with the noun form of зо́рка (zórka) if you so choose. KamiruPL (talk) 06:56, 18 October 2025 (UTC)
Old English. Vealhurl (talk) 22:00, 16 October 2025 (UTC)
- Here is the page where it's mentioned in the Bosworth-Toller lexicon (page 1174, first entry on the left-hand side of the page), and here is the source it cites: page 60, line 23 in the left-hand column]: "Nux, hnut-beam, oððe walh-hnutu". Finally, here is Wright's footnote about the manuscript he copied it from. Chuck Entz (talk) 04:20, 17 October 2025 (UTC)
Paraguayan Guaraní.
Haven't found it attested anywhere. Krivoshein ({{R:gug:Neeryru}}) doesn't record it, and apparently there isn't a single use of "hasave" in all four translations of the Bible in Paraguayan Guaraní ({{RQ:gug:Bible}}). The creator of the page had also created a blatantly wrong entry, now somewhat adjusted: hi'ári (equivalente to Old Tupi i + 'ara + -i ). Pinging User:Trooper57. Yacàwotçã (talk) 02:34, 18 October 2025 (UTC)
- Delete. A preposition in a Tupi-Guarani language? Such heresy. Trooper57 (talk) 03:18, 18 October 2025 (UTC)
Turkish. All Google Books hits I found were from Ottoman texts. Bartanaqa (talk) 20:33, 22 October 2025 (UTC)
- RFV-failed Bartanaqa (talk) 19:14, 6 December 2025 (UTC)
Dutch. How this can be a plural of moe is unclear to me. @DrJos Exarchus (talk) 08:18, 23 October 2025 (UTC)
- It can be a dialectal diminutive: moe + -ken, as seen used this page. (It cannot be the plural of moeke; that is only moekes.) ‑‑Lambiam 22:56, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
- Changed to dialectal diminutive; marking as RFV resolved. — Mnemosientje (t · c) 14:28, 2 December 2025 (UTC)
Esperanto. No sources, hardly any usable Google results. Robin van der Vliet (talk) (contribs) 15:58, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
- @Robin van der Vliet:There are some sources, although they most likely do not meet WT:CFI. Examples include:
- Language mapping file on GitLab (line 422)
- SWEWE article
- I believe this belongs in WT:RFV/Non-English as it is an attestation issue, not an idiomatic one. If agreed, please move it there. TranqyPoo (talk) 18:08, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Moved from WT:RFDN | TranqyPoo (talk) 15:50, 23 October 2025 (UTC)
Esperanto. Creating topic on behalf of @Rakso43243 for this edit. Added 3 quotes. Request another person's verification before closing. TranqyPoo (talk) 17:02, 24 October 2025 (UTC)
Esperanto. Creating topic on behalf of @197.26.200.120 for this edit. Added 3 quotes to the music sense. Unsure if the following quote would apply to either sense: "Kompreneble eblas kalkuli kun la senkondiĉaj kredantoj kiuj ripetas la gospelon, fidelaj al la marko „La voĉo de ĝia mastro” : la deficitoj kreskas, la publikaj ŝuldoj akumuliĝas.". I could not find any more quotes on Internet Archive, Tekstaro, or eo.wikisource. There could be more on Google Books. TranqyPoo (talk) 19:23, 24 October 2025 (UTC)
- I suspect that quote is using sense 4 of English gospel: "A message expected to have positive reception or effect, one promoted as offering important (or even infallible) guiding principles." Perhaps that more metaphorical meaning of 'gospel' is why gospelo was used rather than evangelio, which may refer to a more literal gospel. —Mahāgaja · talk 09:42, 25 October 2025 (UTC)
Esperanto. Creating topic on behalf of @197.27.81.139 for this edit. Nothing found in Tekstaro and eo.wikisource. Google searches yield commercial websites selling hash. On Internet Archive, there are a plethora of results due to the query "haŝo" including "haso". It appears this term can refer to a computer hash or someone's name. TranqyPoo (talk) 20:07, 24 October 2025 (UTC)
Ottoman Turkish. Bartanaqa (talk) 21:04, 24 October 2025 (UTC)
- RFV-failed Bartanaqa (talk) 19:16, 6 December 2025 (UTC)
Old Tupi, for etymology 2 "Suriname cherry". The only attestation given by Navarro is in História Geral das Guerras Angolanas (page 37), but it seems just Portuguese to me. Pinging @Yacàwotçã. Trooper57 (talk) 05:10, 26 October 2025 (UTC)
- @Trooper57, couldn't you find it in a LGA vocabulary at least? I'm not sure whether it should be deleted, but if it is, then I suppose pikyra, which I created, should go as well. Yacàwotçã (talk) 11:15, 26 October 2025 (UTC)
- @Yacàwotçã: I couldn't find it in Trier and I don't think I'll have much success with the other sources, the species isn't native to North Brazil after all. I guess the 'ybapytanga > pitanga change just happened within Portuguese. Trooper57 (talk) 14:58, 26 October 2025 (UTC)
Indonesian. Added by @Xbypass and removed out of process in diff. — SURJECTION / T / C / L / 10:13, 26 October 2025 (UTC)
Arabic. Seems like an invention. All google hits are just misspellings of إِغْرِيقِيَّة (ʔiḡrīqiyya). --Etisop (talk) 14:50, 26 October 2025 (UTC)
- RFV-failed Bartanaqa (talk) 06:48, 7 December 2025 (UTC)
Afar. Can't find anything of the kind in the language itself. Thadh (talk) 23:19, 30 October 2025 (UTC)
Finnish. Thread moved here from the Tea Room, where the comment was: When I search the internet for Finnish SI prefixes, I get tsepto- for zepto-. The page tseptosekunti exists too, this zeptosekunti variant should be deleted unless evidence is found for its acceptability. -- Mölli-Möllerö (talk) 06:17, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
. —Mahāgaja · talk 07:16, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
- It actually looks like that zeptosekunti has more results online than tseptosekunti. The former is even found in at least one BGC result. — SURJECTION / T / C / L / 08:27, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
- Cited — SURJECTION / T / C / L / 16:53, 5 November 2025 (UTC)
- RFV-passed — SURJECTION / T / C / L / 17:42, 12 November 2025 (UTC)
November 2025
[edit]Old Norse: "rudder". Both Cleasby-Vigfússon and Zoëga only have the sense "rowing". — SURJECTION / T / C / L / 22:02, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Lisan ud-Dawat Gujarati Entries
[edit]Gujarati. Orthography appears inconsistent.
- k is spelled variably with
- h is spelt with ھ, which typically indicates aspiration, but it also seems to represent હ (ha) in Gujarati, e.g. پھاڑ (pahāṛ), دھاڑو (dahāṛo), پنکھو (pankho), گھر (ghar), ھيّوں (haiyũ), ھردہ (hirdā).
- e/ī/ai
- Transliterations show nasalization but no final ں, unlike in ھيّوں (haiyũ), سوں (sũ), or اچھوں (acchũ): ابلوو (ubalvũ), نکلوو (nikalvũ), پکاوؤ (pakāvvũ).
- لفافهؤ (lifāfo) appears to be لِفَافَة (lifāfa) with ؤ appended. انديشه (andeśo) lacks this ending.
- فنکھو (faṅkho), ڈاڑم (ḍāṛam) forms are unattested or uncommon in standard Gujarati.
Most of the entries seem to be from the Wikipedia article Lisan ud-Dawat, which is tagged for multiple reliability and sourcing issues. स्वर्गसुख (talk) 14:59, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Ojibwe. — SURJECTION / T / C / L / 07:27, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
- Created as a translated sum of parts of Wikimedia Incubator project article for ChatGPT as the term does not have an exact translation and the whole point is to make it intelligible for monolinguals, etymology has been added 2607:FB92:2506:52E3:8406:12FE:3E76:BD4C 08:47, 8 November 2025 (UTC)
- Wikipedia/Incubator titles aren't reliable sources for terms, especially in more minor languages. — SURJECTION / T / C / L / 08:58, 8 November 2025 (UTC)
- This is not a title. We were invited by the community to add our new words used by the Ojibwe people in our Wikipedia project. Who speak a major regional language of the indigenous languages of North America. How else can we define things? Growbrousa (talk) 03:51, 14 November 2025 (UTC)
- If it's a term only used on Wikipedia, it doesn't count. It needs to actually be in use by speakers. — SURJECTION / T / C / L / 08:30, 14 November 2025 (UTC)
- Who exactly are you (ie who is "we")? Who exactly invited you to add your new words? Wiktionary and Wikimedia Incubator editors must not invent new terms for the sake of Wikimedia projects (if you invent a term and it is used by other people, only then may you add it to Wiktionary/Incubator/etc.). JGHFunRun (talk) 05:06, 30 November 2025 (UTC)
- This is not a title. We were invited by the community to add our new words used by the Ojibwe people in our Wikipedia project. Who speak a major regional language of the indigenous languages of North America. How else can we define things? Growbrousa (talk) 03:51, 14 November 2025 (UTC)
- Wikipedia/Incubator titles aren't reliable sources for terms, especially in more minor languages. — SURJECTION / T / C / L / 08:58, 8 November 2025 (UTC)
Ojibwe. — SURJECTION / T / C / L / 07:27, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Translingual. Hot word from 2023, Indicates that something is of high intellectual value.
I found mention on Reddit and in various glossaries or catalogs of memes, but no uses. Entry suggests it was (is?) popular on TikTok, but I'm not sure how one would search that. Cnilep (talk) 05:31, 6 November 2025 (UTC)
RFV failed. Cnilep (talk) 03:08, 7 December 2025 (UTC)
- @Cnilep: You can find a lot of uses of this word by typing “🍷🗿” into the Twitter search bar, though it appears it might have other senses as well. LunaEatsTuna (talk) 03:23, 7 December 2025 (UTC)
- Would you mind adding three to the entry? I don't use Twitter. Cnilep (talk) 03:39, 7 December 2025 (UTC)
- Yes. I will look through it in the next week or so. LunaEatsTuna (talk) 03:42, 7 December 2025 (UTC)
Northern Sami. Removed out of process by IP, who claims to be a native speaker. — SURJECTION / T / C / L / 13:19, 6 November 2025 (UTC)
- This was speedied again - but looking more into it, it seems like this would count under "created in error". It seems this was indeed created based on a misinterpretation of the ending -it as a verbal (infinitive) ending. — SURJECTION / T / C / L / 11:43, 13 November 2025 (UTC)
Turkish. Google Books only shows Ottoman texts and Turkish-Ottoman Turkish dictionaries. Bartanaqa (talk) 22:48, 6 November 2025 (UTC)
- RFV-failed Bartanaqa (talk) 06:51, 7 December 2025 (UTC)
Turkish. I could only find this word in Ottoman texts/dictionaries. Bartanaqa (talk) 23:00, 6 November 2025 (UTC)
- RFV-failed Bartanaqa (talk) 06:54, 7 December 2025 (UTC)
Turkish. Bartanaqa (talk) 23:56, 6 November 2025 (UTC)
- RFV-failed Bartanaqa (talk) 06:57, 7 December 2025 (UTC)
Turkish. Bartanaqa (talk) 09:38, 7 November 2025 (UTC)
- RFV-failed Bartanaqa (talk) 07:00, 7 December 2025 (UTC)
Turkish. I only found this in Ottoman texts. Bartanaqa (talk) 09:56, 7 November 2025 (UTC)
- RFV-failed Bartanaqa (talk) 07:02, 7 December 2025 (UTC)
Turkish. Google books shows only Ottoman texts. Bartanaqa (talk) 11:37, 7 November 2025 (UTC)
- RFV-failed Bartanaqa (talk) 07:04, 7 December 2025 (UTC)
Turkish.Bartanaqa (talk) 12:47, 7 November 2025 (UTC)
- RFV-failed Bartanaqa (talk) 07:06, 7 December 2025 (UTC)
Turkish. Bartanaqa (talk) 12:56, 7 November 2025 (UTC)
- RFV-failed Bartanaqa (talk) 07:10, 7 December 2025 (UTC)
Turkish. Bartanaqa (talk) 13:06, 7 November 2025 (UTC)
- RFV-failed Bartanaqa (talk) 07:25, 7 December 2025 (UTC)
Turkish. Bartanaqa (talk) 13:35, 7 November 2025 (UTC)
- RFV-failed Bartanaqa (talk) 07:43, 7 December 2025 (UTC)
Turkish. Çağbayır, Yaşar (2007), “nasibe”, in Ötüken Türkçe Sözlük (in Turkish), volume 4, Istanbul: Ötüken Neşriyat, page 3495 is referenced, but he marks the word as {OsT} (Ottoman Turkish). Bartanaqa (talk) 13:49, 7 November 2025 (UTC)
- RFV-failed Bartanaqa (talk) 07:45, 7 December 2025 (UTC)
Esperanto. No results from: Tekstaro, Internet Archive, eo.wikisource, Google. Not in ReVo or PIV. TranqyPoo (talk) 18:03, 8 November 2025 (UTC)
Esperanto. Added 1 quote from a Google search. No results from: Tekstaro, Internet Archive, Google Books, eo.wikisource. Not in ReVo or PIV. TranqyPoo (talk) 18:33, 8 November 2025 (UTC)
Esperanto. Added 1 quote from a Google search; another from Google Books. Found 2 online-only quotes (although, not very illustrative): here and here. No results from: Tekstaro, Internet Archive, eo.wikisource. Not in ReVo or PIV. TranqyPoo (talk) 19:15, 8 November 2025 (UTC)
Esperanto. Found 1 quote from Internet Archive; I could not find more properly used quotes. No luck in Google Books and eo.wikisource. TranqyPoo (talk) 03:45, 9 November 2025 (UTC)
German. Rfv-sense: "fuck!" (interjection). Added by an experienced editor back in 2015. I vaguely remember hearing it (a long time ago). My guess is that it was briefly popular (maybe due to its use in a TV show etc.), but then failed to enter common usage. Jberkel 10:17, 9 November 2025 (UTC)
- (Notifying Matthias Buchmeier, -sche, Jberkel, Fay Freak, Fytcha, Helrasincke): I'm sure I've heard the noun Fick used as an interjection (or maybe it's the imperative fick), but I don't recall ever hearing the infinitive of the verb ficken used that way. —Mahāgaja · talk 23:09, 10 November 2025 (UTC)
- This is a case of someone’s prescriptivism leading to denial of reality, a collectivist thinking about language not admitting that people have a choice, within a range of the functional and various optimals: like rather than to express (with their crippled vocabulary in which immature conformist concerns pull the strings, so regularly left over by school and mass media education) how nonstandard starten in the same scope as beginnen is, which I achieved ereyesterday, they outright deny it, which is less information than to brashly advise not to use a certain term or construct (which would expose them to the obvious charge of prescriptivism they cannot defend themselves against).
- I recall it used bare times, nonstandard it be, in seeming imitation of the English, as well as the Russian or other Slavic, which are obviously infinitives. In contrast, I am sure I have never heard “the noun Fick or the imperative fick” as an interjection.
- I am not in the mood to sexsurf in order to cite this term right now. There may be nonchalant belles-lettres containing examples, and statistically there must be rap, though tell me how to filter that. Fay Freak (talk) 00:11, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
- It's some creative use of language, and many things can be turned into interjections. I wasn't able to find anything, it's quite tricky to search because so many infinitives come up. We should just leave it be, someone will come around and remove it again. Jberkel 09:21, 16 November 2025 (UTC)
- I've been doing a whole bunch of citations recently so I took this on as a challenge. I added five cites (of which four would count as uncontroversially durably archived, I think) across 25 years and that should definitely be enough to pass CFI.
- So much sex talk to scroll throgh. At least searching for collocations with "ach", "ey", "mann" helped a bit. It still felt like I was scraping the bottom of the barrel for usages. Maybe that would be enough to qualify it for "rare".
- I feel like it might not actually have been fully lexicalized until later, but rather re-derived occasionally by way of Zangendeutsch, the practice of replacing various English loanwords with intentionally overly-literal German translations. Doing that was (is?) definitely a part of some German online circles, sometimes more (your krautchans and ich_iel's), sometimes less. It may have caught on from there. PhoenicianLetters (talk) 20:51, 17 November 2025 (UTC)
- Nice work! Aha, never heard the name Zangendeutsch, interesting. Sort of a German Anglish, but more humorous. Brauser, Jokus, Winzigweich (“Microsoft”). Jberkel 21:22, 17 November 2025 (UTC)
- RFV-passed Jberkel 10:25, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
Dutch. Do superlatives of adjectives on -isch actually exist? Not according to woordenlijst.org. Exarchus (talk) 12:08, 9 November 2025 (UTC)
- So actually rfv for all results of this search. Exarchus (talk) 12:12, 9 November 2025 (UTC)
- Hmm, when I look for "fantastischte" I do get sensible results. Exarchus (talk) 12:20, 9 November 2025 (UTC)
- But I'd tend to think that the forms without -e don't actually occur. I.e. people say "het fantastischte", not "het fantastischt". Exarchus (talk) 12:53, 9 November 2025 (UTC)
Esperanto. Added 1 quote from Internet Archive; remaining results refer to dictionaries/glossaries. No results in Google Books, eo.wikisource. Google searches majorly yield wiki articles. TranqyPoo (talk) 17:25, 9 November 2025 (UTC)
Esperanto. Rfv-sense: "bit". A Google search and Tekstaro yielded attestable results for 'binary'. I could not find any Esperanto texts in my Internet Archive search. No results in eo.wikisource. No entries in ReVo or Komputeko. PIV points to 'duuma', referring to 'binary'. TranqyPoo (talk) 22:29, 10 November 2025 (UTC)
Esperanto. No results in Google, Internet Archive, Tekstaro, eo.wikisource. Not in ReVo, PIV, or Komputeko. TranqyPoo (talk) 22:56, 10 November 2025 (UTC)
Esperanto. No results in Google, Internet Archive, eo.wikisource, Tekstaro. No entries in ReVo, PIV, Komputeko. TranqyPoo (talk) 23:44, 10 November 2025 (UTC)
Thai. First time hearing this word as a native speaker. "Airship" is called "เรือเหาะ" in Thai, and "balloon", "บอลลูน". Neither of them is called "รถสวรรค์" in Thai, which literally means "car to heaven". The term is not found used anywhere in relation to airship or balloon. A Google search returns nothing about this term in relation to airship or balloon. -- Flamevine (talk) 05:43, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
Polish. Nothing on NKJP, polona, or Google books. Looks like an obvious Wikipedia protologism. Vininn126 (talk) 15:39, 13 November 2025 (UTC)
Turkish. Bartanaqa (talk) 10:26, 14 November 2025 (UTC)
Tigrinya. Not listed by {{R:ti:Gugarts:2022}} or {{R:ti:Kane:2000}}, I couldn't find any durable quotations either. Santi2222 (talk) 15:40, 14 November 2025 (UTC)
Malayalam for "bus". Tagged by the creator, for some reason. Ultimateria (talk) 22:24, 21 November 2025 (UTC)
Assyrian Neo-Aramaic for "signal". Rationale was "not used or simply an obsolete dialectal term used by bilingual speakers". Ultimateria (talk) 22:33, 21 November 2025 (UTC)
Czech. Tagged as an RFD (I converted it to an RFV) by User:Random0Being with the comment ”Apologies if I'm mistaken, but I genuinely cannot find a single occurrence of this word anywhere, not even in any (historical) Czech corpora”. Added by User:Zhnka. — SURJECTION / T / C / L / 20:28, 22 November 2025 (UTC)
Esperanto. Added 2 quotes from Internet Archive and Google Books. There are more results, but they seem to use the term in a figurative sense: here, here, here and here. I'm unable to decipher them properly if they are not figurative. TranqyPoo (talk) 02:40, 23 November 2025 (UTC)
Polish.
Per CFI, we do not quote other WMF cites. Vininn126 (talk) 11:06, 23 November 2025 (UTC)
Esperanto. No results in Internet Archive, eo.wikisource, Google Books, and Tekstaro. Google search results in product websites and a Facebook post showing a conversion from animals (in plural form) to animals (using -ar-). TranqyPoo (talk) 19:58, 23 November 2025 (UTC)
Tigrinya. A misspelling of ኩኽ, all results seem to be transliterations of English Cook. Santi2222 (talk) 21:33, 23 November 2025 (UTC)
Tatar.
===Conjunction===
{{tt-pos|conjunction|c|l|bilan}}
# [[belong]], be along with, [[with]]
Properly spelled белән (belän). —Fish bowl (talk) 02:54, 25 November 2025 (UTC)
Old Church Slavonic, only for "crane". This (or жеравь for that matter) doesn't seem to exist in OCS. Exarchus (talk) 10:30, 25 November 2025 (UTC)
December 2025
[edit]Zhuang (Jingxi dialect?). Created and tagged by @Arafsymudwr based on สืบ#Etymology (@GinGlaep). Note that "-wp" is not a valid initialfinal in Standard Zhuang orthography. —Fish bowl (talk) 09:58, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
- Surely the question is whether it's a valid final. —Mahāgaja · talk 10:21, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
Zhuang. Is this used outside of Wikipedia (and mirrors)? — justin(r)leung { (t...) | c=› } 17:32, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
Zhuang, "vagina". —Fish bowl (talk) 02:38, 2 December 2025 (UTC)
Tatar. Misspelling of zəꞑgər (зәңгәр); see for example https://t.me/yanalif_janalif/116 —Fish bowl (talk) 03:06, 2 December 2025 (UTC)
Dutch. Calque of English greedflation. It was apparently selected as 2023 Word of the Year by dictionary publisher Dikke Van Dale, but I can't find it used after that year. I do find it mentioned in German, English, and Spanish in the context of the 2023 Word of the Year selection, but not used in Dutch. Cnilep (talk) 03:44, 2 December 2025 (UTC)
- This is in very common use, particularly in colloquial political conversations. Google Books alone has enough material despite the recency of its coinage. "Graaiflatie" + the name of any of the major newspapers (NRC, Trouw, Volkskrant, Telegraaf) on Google also yields more than enough. I added some quotes to satisfy RFV requirements. — Mnemosientje (t · c) 12:37, 2 December 2025 (UTC)
- Cited by Mnemosientje. Cnilep (talk) 04:30, 4 December 2025 (UTC)
Tatar.
# {{lb|tt|A term of address for someone}} [[man]], [[dude]]
Literally эне + м, "my younger brother", cf. the lullaby Йокла, энем.
The additional senses recorded in Таңлат @ https://suzlek.antat.ru/, "term of address for a younger man", seem to have a different connotation to "man, dude". —Fish bowl (talk) 04:25, 2 December 2025 (UTC)
- (pinging @Gidriano —Fish bowl (talk) 04:25, 2 December 2025 (UTC))
- Reminds me of the video I saw once of an American guy in his 20s chatting with a British guy in his 30s. The video was subtitled in Korean, and every time the American called the Brit "my dude" the Korean subtitles translated it with "older brother". —Mahāgaja · talk 09:30, 4 December 2025 (UTC)
- @Fish bowl: Could you at least add the noun form entry, so that the entry does not get deleted just for being a non-lemma? Thadh (talk) 12:31, 4 December 2025 (UTC)
Malay. Tagged for speedy deletion by ~2025-36761-59, who said This isn't a Malay for borax, it's tingkal & bleng!
. — Polomo ⟨ oi! ⟩ · 15:53, 4 December 2025 (UTC)
ञ़ and ञ, or ɲʱ and ɲ, do not appear in https://www.webonary.org/marwari/ nor in Marwari language. While it’s possible ञ़ ɲʱ is used in borrowings, there are not references provided at all. --Moyogo (talk) 16:20, 4 December 2025 (UTC)
Kolami. Tagged for speedy deletion by @Plantman: unsourced
. — Polomo ⟨ oi! ⟩ · 04:08, 5 December 2025 (UTC)
Kolami. Tagged for speedy deletion by @Plantman: duplicate entry of మూందీ, without attestation
. If this is considered a misspelling, though, it’s a matter for WT:RFDN. — Polomo ⟨ oi! ⟩ · 04:09, 5 December 2025 (UTC)
Kolami. Tagged for speedy deletion by @Plantman: unsourced
. — Polomo ⟨ oi! ⟩ · 04:10, 5 December 2025 (UTC)
Kolami. Tagged for speedy deletion by @Plantman: no source that the trill letter is used, also to a previous edit, there is no code for old kolami or any source for its words
. If this is considered a misspelling, though, it’s a matter for WT:RFDN. — Polomo ⟨ oi! ⟩ · 04:10, 5 December 2025 (UTC)
Tamil. Tagged for speedy deletion by @Plantman: This word doesn't exist.
— Polomo ⟨ oi! ⟩ · 04:11, 5 December 2025 (UTC)
Kolami. Tagged for speedy deletion by @Plantman: unsourced
. — Polomo ⟨ oi! ⟩ · 04:12, 5 December 2025 (UTC)
Kolami. Tagged for speedy deletion by @Plantman: unsourced
. — Polomo ⟨ oi! ⟩ · 04:13, 5 December 2025 (UTC)
Kolami. Tagged for speedy deletion by @Plantman: unsourced
. — Polomo ⟨ oi! ⟩ · 04:14, 5 December 2025 (UTC)
Central Kurdish. Tagged for speedy deletion by @Gejeluk: There is no such thing as “لەنجەباز” in Central Kurdish
. — Polomo ⟨ oi! ⟩ · 04:14, 5 December 2025 (UTC)
Ket. This was tagged as a rfd by User:AmaçsızBirKişi. Should this be moved, deleted or is this entry correct? Jberkel 08:38, 5 December 2025 (UTC)
- Now redirected to съʼнь by User:Chrysanthemum1319. Jberkel 09:50, 5 December 2025 (UTC)
Esperanto. Rfv-sense: television network. Added 1 quote from Internet Archive. No results in eo.wikisource, Tekstaro. 1 result in Google Books, but unable to obtain full quote. Google search predominately displays the song contest sense. TranqyPoo [💬 | ✏️] 04:17, 6 December 2025 (UTC)
Turkish. Supposedly means "pink". Added by an IP over a decade ago. Bartanaqa (talk) 19:09, 6 December 2025 (UTC)
Translingual. A species. There has been a subgenus of Alcippe called Fulvetta, ie, Alcippe (Fulvetta). One can find reference to "Alcippe Fulvettas" and "Alcippe fulvettas", but not as species name. DCDuring (talk) 03:50, 7 December 2025 (UTC)
- I have added Alcippe fulvetta as an English vernacular name, as it was originally entered. DCDuring (talk) 04:33, 7 December 2025 (UTC)
- My mistake. Apparently fulvetta is both a common name and a taxonomic name, but the latter is only as a genus-level taxon, and thus capitalized. This should be redefined as "any fulvetta in the genus Alcippe", and returned to English- if it's not SOP. After all, it woud be like saying "Hominidae primates" when referring to hominids, or "Cymbidium orchids"- just mentioning the taxonomic name in order to narrow the scope of a common name with multiple referents. Chuck Entz
- Misleading name/orthography. It would be clearer were the name alcippeid fulvetta (unattested AFAICT), in parallel to one of the other fulvetta groups. It took me a while to get the four different fulvetta groups. Is it OK now? DCDuring (talk) 19:47, 7 December 2025 (UTC)
Yiddish. Looked through the Belarusian dictionary, JNW (the Dutch dictionary), the CYED (Verterbukh) and the CEYD, couldn't find it. It's used on the Yiddish Wikipedia, but it's not in any dictionary I have access to. If anyone has access to other, perhaps older, dictionaries, please look in there. — This unsigned comment was added by Dijacz (talk • contribs) at 09:59, 7 December 2025 (UTC).
- Seems attestable. At least here, there were also some quotes on Archive, but I couldn't verify them because it seems to be down for now. Thadh (talk) 11:57, 7 December 2025 (UTC)
- It's not in Weinreich's dictionary either, but it appears in the penultimate paragraph on page 105 of this book (and at least 10 more times according to the full text page). The full text view of this book also indicates it's used at least twice there (plus one instance of אָבלאַסטנאָיער (oblastnoyer), which I guess is an adjective form), but I don't have the patience to try and find it on the scans. Here's a third full-text view where it appears twice. —Mahāgaja · talk 18:38, 7 December 2025 (UTC)
Old English. Invalid title, but probably also 'revived' Old English. Not in Bosworth-Toller. — SURJECTION / T / C / L / 10:06, 8 December 2025 (UTC)