Talk:qengj
Add topicLatest comment: 11 years ago by Metaknowledge
"From qingj (dial. Cham), from *(a)cíngla, double metathesis of Vulgar Latin *agniculus, diminutive of Latin agnus."
Please, do not write this kind of etymologies!
The following discussion has been moved from Wiktionary:Requests for cleanup.
This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.
Are these words paronyms? If so, is "Paronyms" a standard header? If not, should it be? Kassadbot tagged the header as nonstandard. - -sche (discuss) 22:07, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
- Paronym is not a standard header (WT:ELE has a list of "allowable -nyms"). I suppose the fact that one is inherited directly from PIE, while the other is borrowed from a Latin descendant of the same root, would mean that they're paronyms according to our definition, though our definition doesn't quite agree with the ones on my Mac's dictionary app (New Oxford American Dictionary, if I remember correctly): the Mac has "a word that is a derivative of another and has a related meaning" and "a word formed by adaptation of a foreign word", while our definition is: "A word derived from the same root, or with the same sound, as another word". Chuck Entz (talk) 23:21, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
- ELE has an inexhaustive list of allowed headers, though now that I've found the supplementary list (WT:POS), I see it concerns POS headers only, so ELE's list of -onyms is exhaustive. I suppose these paronyms should be related terms? - -sche (discuss) 23:52, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
- One means "lamb", one means "yearling lamb", right? I'd either call them synonyms of each other, or a hyponym and hypernym. They're not paronyms by our definition since they're not derived from the same root. —Angr 14:53, 30 September 2012 (UTC)