Talk:बरछा

Etymology

@शब्दशोधक vr / व्र / 𑀯𑁆𑀭 is not a permissible onset in Sauraseni. Kutchkutch (talk) 10:58, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Now that you mention it, that's true! -- 𝓑𝓱𝓪𝓰𝓪𝓭𝓪𝓽𝓽𝓪^{(𝓽𝓪𝓵𝓴)} 11:37, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

@Kutchkutch, Bhagadatta: Maybe, but I don't think reconstructions follow the rules. At some point, the etymology of उसाँस said {{inh|hi|sa|*उत्श्वास}}, ignoring the rules of sandhi, (ud + śvāsa already has an entry उच्छ्वास). And if that's wrong, then please tell me what would the Śaurasenī term be! 🔥शब्दशोधक🔥 14:22, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

@शब्दशोधक: I think what happened at उसाँस was that the ud- prefix was attached AFTER श्वास had evolved into sassa or something like that; so the prefix was assimilated. Here, (I think) the predecessor to बरछा would be something like *varchaga more or less but that is a speculation I'm not willing to put on the page there. So why don't we just give the etymology as Sanskrit व्रश्चक? -- 𝓑𝓱𝓪𝓰𝓪𝓭𝓪𝓽𝓽𝓪^{(𝓽𝓪𝓵𝓴)} 15:16, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

@Bhagadatta: I'm fine with removing the Prakrit term, but then, which Skt. term you prefer - व्रश्च् + -अन् = व्रश्चन् (R:hi:Dasa) or व्रश्च् + -अक? 🔥शब्दशोधक🔥 15:22, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

@शब्दशोधक: Maybe they have व्रश्चन् as a masculine n stem noun with nom sg as व्रश्चा. I would personally prefer व्रश्चक but if you want to go by the sources alone then you can give Dasa's etymology and inline it. -- 𝓑𝓱𝓪𝓰𝓪𝓭𝓪𝓽𝓽𝓪^{(𝓽𝓪𝓵𝓴)} 15:29, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

प्यार

@AryamanA, Kutchkutch, Bhagadatta, Inqilābī Please help solve this edit war. 🔥शब्दशोधक🔥 10:52, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

@SodhakSH, Kutchkutch: There don't seem to be many noun-adjective pair with the noun being formed by the deletion of the final ā of the adjective. Usually nouns are formed by attaching the -पन suffix. (In case of participles you can find quite a few examples like डर and डरा (हुआ), रोक and रोका (हुआ) etc). But प्यार is not the stem of any such verb. The original Sanskrit term was an adjective but it is possible for nouns to be inherited from adjectives and vice versa (e.g. धुन (dhun)). So it may well have been inherited from priyakāra. That said, @The Witty Warrior you should not revert a fellow editor without offering an explanation let alone do it twice when the other party has given one for their edit. You could've addressed his points before making your edit. -- 𝓑𝓱𝓪𝓰𝓪𝓭𝓪𝓽𝓽𝓪^{(𝓽𝓪𝓵𝓴)} 12:34, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

@Bhagadatta: How about this etymology? I think etymology of pyārā should be what it is (maybe change the Prakrit term if it has any problems). Thanks. 🔥शब्दशोधक🔥 14:59, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

@Bhagadatta: There is an Old Marathi term प्रियपण (priyapaṇa, “being beloved, dear”) in {{R:omr:Tulpule}}.

@शांतनु Wouldn't the Sauraseni reconstruction for प्रिय-कार(क) (priya-kāra(ka)) resemble *𑀧𑀺𑀅-𑀕𑀸𑀭(-𑀕) (*pia-gāra(-ga)) rather than *𑀧𑀺𑀬𑀆𑀭𑀅 (*piyaāraa) at प्यारा (pyārā)?

प्रिय (priya) → 𑀧𑀺𑀅 (pia) with no hiatus filler 𑀬 (ya) in Sauraseni

-कार (-kāra) → -𑀕𑀸𑀭 (-gāra) based on सुनार (sunār) < 𑀲𑀼(𑀯)𑀡𑁆𑀡-𑀕𑀸𑀭 (su(va)ṇṇa-gāra)

-क (-ka) → -𑀕 (-ga) from Template:inc-extension/documentation

Since *𑀧𑀺𑀅-𑀆𑀭 (*pia-āra), was reduced to 𑀧𑀺𑀆𑀭 (piāra), the Sauraseni reconstruction could possibly be reduced to *𑀧𑀺𑀕𑀸𑀭(-𑀕) (*pigāra(-ga)). Kutchkutch (talk) 10:03, 15 April 2021 (UTC)