Reconstruction talk:Proto-Japonic/sima

Relatedness

@Atitarev, Karaeng Matoaya, Suzukaze-c, any others interested --

Japanese shima appears to be related to verb root shim-, describing "closed, not open":

• しまう (shimau, “to put something away; to do something completely, irrevocably”)
• 閉まる (shimaru, “to be closed, not open”)
• 閉める (shimeru, “to close something”)
• 染みる (shimiru, “to seep or soak into something and not come out again; to stain”)
• 沈る (shimoru, “to take on water and sink”, archaic)

Compare the sense of Latin insula (“island”) and derived English insulate (“to close off”).

This prompts me to ask:

• Is there any similar cluster in Koreanic terms around this apparent root? If so, we might be dealing with a cognate, or at any rate, a very old borrowing that has had time to nativize and produce derivatives.
• If there are no related terms in Koreanic, might this be a borrowing from Japonic?
• If it is instead a borrowing from Koreanic into Japonic, what would account for all the apparently related verbs in Japanese? Chance resemblance?

Cheers, ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │^{Tala við mig} 22:41, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

@Eirikr: Thanks for the ping, I am interesting in the subject but I don't have much knowledge on this etymology. --Anatoli T. ^{(обсудить}/^вклад) 22:50, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

IIRC Vovin (2010) considers this a borrowing. From pre-root *sim with *-a suffixed. Chuterix (talk) 23:13, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

Interesting, thank you! However, I note that Vovin's ideas go back and forth over the years -- a good thing, if someone is actively studying and learning more. If memory serves, his thoughts on the source of 海 (wata) changed a few times, for instance. I can't easily agree with the contention that the Japanese is a borrowing, given the large list of semantically related terms. If instead you mean that the Korean is a borrowing, I have no particular argument -- my familiarity with Korean is much more limited.

FWIW, titles of works are much more user-friendly than this unfortunately opaque [NAME] [YEAR] notation.

Cheers! ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │^{Tala við mig} 00:48, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

See Wiktionary:About Proto-Japonic and look at the Vovin (2010) section @Eirikr. Chuterix (talk) 01:20, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Re: sources, yes, I saw that earlier. My point still stands: it is much easier for people when you give the title of a work rather than [NAME] [YEAR]. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │^{Tala við mig} 05:16, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

(whatever...) Chuterix (talk) 05:27, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Usability is a thing, my friend. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │^{Tala við mig} 18:48, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

forgot real to visit Wiktionary:About Proto-Japonic/references and go to V sectiom Chuterix (talk) 18:03, 1 July 2023 (UTC)

@Eirikr Chuterix (talk) 18:03, 1 July 2023 (UTC)