Reconstruction talk:Proto-West Germanic/faldistōl

@Hazarasp if you want to delete this entry in favor of a PWG compound entry, I would say you need to create a solid PWG *fald(ī) or *faldīg entry first. --{{victar|talk}} 19:27, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

I'm not sure that'll be necessary. It seems that *faldi does exist after all; note Old English fyld (“fold”). Hazarasp (parlement · werkis) 02:02, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

"From earlier *field"? That form looks like it's from a zero-grade *fuldiz. --{{victar|talk}} 07:04, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

No, it can come from *faldiz; compare wielm/wylm ← *walmiz, ielf ← *albiz, ċiele ← *kaliz. Where do you think the -ie- in field(e)stōl comes from? Hazarasp (parlement · werkis) 09:33, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Cool, so create a *faldi entry. And to answer your question, readjustments using existing related forms are very common. --{{victar|talk}} 17:03, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

I think you rather missed my point. fieldestōl is the regular reflex of *faldistōl in some OE dialects, so no readjustment is necessary. Hazarasp (parlement · werkis) 23:15, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Really, because I think you missed mine, not to penis flex on you. My point is readjustment *is* possible, weather necessary or not. To discredit is outhand is foolhardy. --{{victar|talk}} 08:43, 7 August 2021 (UTC)