Talk:kiat-kiat
Latest comment: 3 months ago by Mlgc1998 in topic Etymology
Etymology[edit]
@Mlgc1998 I was wondering what your source was for the etymology. Mar vin kaiser (talk) 13:21, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Mar vin kaiser I looked into it before in Hokkien dictionaries when I made the 結結 entry, so that one is from: TW from Ogawa 1932 臺日大辭典 and p.95 of 1923 Barclay in Douglas (1873). for relationship with kiat-kiat fruit, I surmised it from the definitions related to it since the kiat-kiat citrus fruit was likely produced as a hybrid citrus fruit just like ponkan and others. See the other regional hybrids of Mandarin orange or perhaps it's some sort of clementine hybrid or another citrus fruit. I had not yet found the exact Hokkien word used for the kiat-kiat fruit itself, if there is a different one, so if that ever comes up, that could be the better etymon of kiat-kiat, but for now at least online, I only see the English and Tagalog form attested online due to its market distribution in the philippines and elsewhere. There is a possibility too of course that perhaps the etymon should be 結 + 桔/橘 = 結桔 or 結橘 or it is for some reason 桔桔 / 橘橘 due to 桔/橘 and 桔仔/橘仔. Mlgc1998 (talk) 01:19, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Mlgc1998: Based on what you said, you have no proof that it's from 結結, so remember, we should err on caution. Don't claim it comes from something if we have no proof. Even entries where we have sources saying this word comes from this Hokkien word, unless for example we have strong one-to-one correspondences between definitions and pronunciation, we err on caution and say that it's this source that says this, then we can add criticism on why it might not be the case. We can add our guesses too but we shouldn't claim it to be correct (unless strong one-to-one correspondences and no big room for doubt). --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 13:09, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Mar vin kaiser alright, I'll word it as a borrowing from Hokkien, then the 結結 as one of the See alsos Mlgc1998 (talk) 14:30, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Mlgc1998: Based on what you said, you have no proof that it's from 結結, so remember, we should err on caution. Don't claim it comes from something if we have no proof. Even entries where we have sources saying this word comes from this Hokkien word, unless for example we have strong one-to-one correspondences between definitions and pronunciation, we err on caution and say that it's this source that says this, then we can add criticism on why it might not be the case. We can add our guesses too but we shouldn't claim it to be correct (unless strong one-to-one correspondences and no big room for doubt). --Mar vin kaiser (talk) 13:09, 18 February 2024 (UTC)