Talk:Slavicism

"Slavonic borrowings in the Romano-Germanic languages"
This book is not in World Cat and the etymologies it claims are Slavic are not claimed to be so by other etymological dictionaries. [EDIT: When I search via ISBN I get this book: Das Familiengedächtnis : Erinnerung im deutsch-jüdischen Bürgertum 1890 bis 1932.]

For instance, it claims that PG hlaifaz comes from Slavic, but the Etymologische Wörterbuch des Deutschen says in its article on German "Laib" Herkunft ungeklärt (origin unknown) and further states Frühe Entlehnungen aus dem Germ. führen zu aslaw. chlěbъ ‘Brot’, russ. chleb (хлеб) ‘Brot, Getreide’, lett. klaips ‘Laib Brot’, finn. leipä ‘Brot’. (Early loans from Germanic lead to Old Slavonic chlěbъ 'bread', Russian khleb (хлеб) "Bread, grain" and Lithuanian klaips "Loaf, broad" Finnish leipä "Bread"). The same is reported at loaf at the Online Etymology Dictionary.

Kettle, also claimed as Slavic, is from Latin, as is kaufen (Gothic kaupjan). Shine (Germ. scheinen) is an Indo-European word, not a loan from Slavic, as is book Buch, Gothic boka.

In short, claiming that these are Slavic loanwords is nonsense and I'm removing them.--Ermenrich (talk) 19:23, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
 * , since you brought up similar problems before.--Ermenrich (talk) 19:51, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Pinging some more editors who appear to have knowledge of IE linguistics: .--Ermenrich (talk) 20:21, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I've removed the same information from Slavic languages .--Ermenrich (talk) 21:53, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
 * , garð is not Slavic, see Etymonline and the Etymologisches Woerterbuch des Deutsches for Garten. The later states: Es ist nicht mit Sicherheit zu entscheiden, ob die germ. Formen direkt auf die Wurzel ie. *g̑her-, *gher- ‘greifen, fassen, um-, einfassen, einzäunen’ zurückzuführen sind, die wohl auch in aind. hárati ‘nimmt, bringt, holt herbei’ vorliegt, oder aber auf eine Wurzelerweiterung ie. *g̑herdh- bzw. *gherdh- ‘umfassen, umzäunen, umgürten’. Im ersten Falle läge ein ie. *ghortós ‘eingezäunter Ort’ zugrunde, und die germ. Formen wären enger mit griech. chórtos (χόρτος) ‘eingehegter Platz, Hof, Weideplatz’, lat. hortus ‘Garten als eingezäunter Ort’ [...] verwandt. Im zweiten Fall gehören nhd. Garten und seine germ. Parallelen enger zu aind. gṛháḥ ‘Haus’, lit. gar̃das, Pferch’, aslaw. gradъ ‘Burg, Stadt, Garten’, russ. górod (город) ‘Stadt’, tschech. hrad ‘Burg, Schloß’ (vgl. tschech. Hradčany, dt. Hradschin, Stadtteil und Burgbezirk von Prag) und innerhalb des Germ. zur Wortgruppe von ↗gürten (s. d.). Auch hier wäre eine ursprüngliche Bedeutung ‘eingezäunter Ort’ anzusetzen. "It cannot be decided with certainty if the Germanic forms can be derived directly from the roots IE *g̑her-, *gher-"grab, hold, surround enclose", which is probably also found in Old Indic hárati "take, bring, fetch", or if it is to be derived from the root extension *g̑herdh- bzw. *gherdh- "surround, fence in, engird". In the first case the basis would be a IE *ghortós "fenced-in place", and the Germanic forms would be more closely related to Greek chórtos (χόρτος) "hedged-in place, court, pasture", Latin hortus "garden as fenced-in place". In the second case the NHG Garten and its Germanic parallels would be more closely related to Old Indic gṛháḥ "House" Lithuanian gardas "pen, sheepfold", Old Slavic gradъ "castle, city, garden" Russian gorod "city [...] and within the Germanic group of gürten(to gird). Here as well an original meaning of "fenced-in place" could be assumed." ( At best the Slavic word gorod is a cognate.--Ermenrich (talk) 14:09, 24 December 2020 (UTC)


 * , you understand references and etymology, so I'll ask you to check my statements. Noraskulk (talk) 14:32, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Considering that your source for all this is the work of a ninth grader at a Russian Lyceum, I'm not sure how you can think any of this is defensible. According to the text you've been using: Автор: Шилов Александр Алексеевич, Муниципальное бюджетное образовательное учреждение, «Лицей», 9 класс «е». Did you not read this information?--Ermenrich (talk) 14:37, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Ermenrich, forget about this article already. Yes, i didn't read it, sorry. Noraskulk (talk) 14:58, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

For the differences
Ermenrich 1. About the "book". "Slavic borrowings in Romano-Germanic languages" is an article that actually exists https://nsportal.ru/ap/library/drugoe/2015/05/23/slavyanskie-zaimstvovaniya-v-romano-germanskih-yazykah). The author relies on two sources: the English-Russian dictionary of Muller and the etymological dictionary of Fasmer 2. 2. About the word "laib"; M. Fasmer writes: "borrowing is more likely than kinship with the last (word). See: Мейе, МSL 11, 179; Стендер-Петерсен 300; Мi. ЕW 87; Лиден, РВВ 15, 515; Уленбек, AfslPh 15, 486; 16, 381; Бернекер I, 389; Соболевский, AfslPh 33, 480 и сл.; ЖМНП, 1911, май, 166; Янко, WuS I, 95; Перссон 303; Хирт, РВВ 23, 338; Эндзелин, СБЭ 121; Брюкнер 179; Махек, "Slavia", 16, 210; Торп 109. In favor of borrowing says and borrowing others-Herm. words in fin. leira " bread". Noraskulk (talk) 14:13, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
 * This is an article on a website, not a reliable source. Please use wp:RS for sourcing, not random websites you find online.--Ermenrich (talk) 14:15, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Noraskulk (talk) 14:21, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Ermenrich, at the expense of the word "bread", see the etymology of Fasmer - https://14.slovaronline.com/14969-ХЛЕБ.
 * Vasmer says it comes from Germanic: Судя по интонации, следует говорить о заимствовании из герм. "Judging by the intonation, one should speak of borrowing from Germanic". --Ermenrich (talk) 14:28, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Ukrainianism
If there is a need for an article "ukrainianism", then perhaps I will try to write it. Noraskulk (talk) 15:37, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Re: Greek "mechanism"
The article states:
 * The Greek word μηχανισμός contains the root "*měxъ", which has a Proto-Slavic origin in the meaning "forge".

However, it is highly doubtful that the Ancient Greek morpheme derives from Slavic. It's either from a Greek inherited root that shares a common Proto-Indo-European origin with Slavic, or borrowed from another language, but almost certainly not a borrowing from Slavic. English "sister" is cognate with Czech "sestra", but that doesn't make it a Slavicism, it's just a cognate. 70.175.192.217 (talk) 18:57, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for catching that - that's obvious nonsense since the Greeks have been talking about mechanike etc. since long before a Proto-Slavic language in that form existed. I've removed it.--Ermenrich (talk) 19:20, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Someone has reinstated the dubious claim. I don't think the readdition is justified. Even if we assume that the Greek and Slavic words are cognate, there's no reason to think the Greeks borrowed it from them. I'm not aware of any words in Ancient Greek that are derived from Balto-Slavic languages, except perhaps for ethnonyms. At the very least Wiktionary does not list any. Note that per Slavs, Greco-Roman historians barely even mentioned Slavs until the 6th century AD, whereas μηχᾰνή is attested at least as far back as 400/500 BC, e.g. in Euripides's Medeia (I'm not going to try to track down the very earliest usage).
 * For the record, Beekes (EDG, pp. 950-951) argues that μηχανή is from Pre-Greek anyway, rather than from Proto-Indo-European. 70.175.192.217 (talk) 06:56, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks again, and also for confirming that Wiktionary (which is used-generated, but with high standards) does in no way support this outlandish claim (see also мех, where nothing of this is mentioned). And FWIW, the Greek and Slavic words can't be cognate, since Greek χ goes back to ǵʰ/gʰ, while Proto-Slavic *х goes back to earlier *s in "RUKI" enviroments. –Austronesier (talk) 11:42, 5 December 2021 (UTC)