Reconstruction talk:Proto-Slavic/xala
@Fay Freak: I gave a brief look on the Knüppel's article, but I failed to find what makes it as indisputable as you see it. Just like all other sources, it considers several possible etymologies and sticks to the one that the author favours. As far as my knowledge goes (I could be wrong), the Turkish hypothesis stems from Karadžić, who identified the creature xala as a serpentine and eventually he (or others) related it to the Turkish loanword for snake. In Bulgarian folklore, хала-s are rarely depicted as typical dragons. More common are depictions as toothless, insatiable monsters (more reminiscent of amphibians or eels) or as transcendental entities which reside in stormclouds or in fog.
The identity between the two terms has been deemed problematic by various specialists: notably Brückner and Petersson + most (if not all) Bulgarian and several Serbian mythologists + the Russian/Soviet sources which I could find. I was left with the impression that the two words are distinct; that's why I didn't specify the Ottoman hypothesis (I was trying to save space). As a sidenote, there are a handful of other theories, which I skipped over for the same reason - independent expressive origin, relation to Proto-Slavic *xalǫga (“~ bundle, fence”) or *xoliti (“to tend, to behave”) /ESSJa/, Greaco-Thracian origin /per Bogdan Petriceicu Hasdeu's Etymologicum Magnum Romaniae (p. 678-682)/, contamination of various sources incl. the Turkish one /per Skok's Etimologijski Rječnik (vol 1 : 650)/, etc.
Since you've risen the issue, it gets clear that the hypothesis for Turkish origin needed mentioning, but I am not convinced it deserves the pedestal you have put it on. Feel free to inquire further opinions, but for now I am still in opinion that the term is worthy of Proto-Slavic entry. Безименен (talk) 22:24, 22 January 2022 (UTC)