Talk:𐌼𐌹𐌳𐌿𐌼𐍉𐌽

RFV discussion: February–March 2020

This entry has survived Wiktionary's verification process (permalink).

Please do not re-nominate for verification without comprehensive reasons for doing so.

---

𐌼𐌹𐌳𐌿𐌼𐍉𐌽

Is this term actually attested being used as a verb/participle ? I can only find the substantive Gothic 𐌼𐌹𐌳𐌿𐌼𐍉𐌽𐌳𐍃 (midumōnds, “mediator”). If not attested, is this a reconstruction ? Leasnam (talk) 17:00, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

@Leasnam AFAIK, Only attested as a substantive. 𐌷𐌻𐌿𐌳𐌰𐍅𐌹𐌲𐍃 𐌰𐌻𐌰𐍂𐌴𐌹𐌺𐌹𐌲𐌲𐍃 (talk) 17:53, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

So a move to reconstruction is needed ? Leasnam (talk) 06:04, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Well, the word is a participle but it is used substantively. Does that make it separate enough from the verb to which the participle belongs to not justify a verb lemma entry? Usually a lemma entry is created for any attested verb, even if only attested as a participle. The fact that this participle is here used substantively does not mean it isn't a participle. Compare also 𐌼𐌹𐌻𐌹𐍄𐍉𐌽𐌳𐍃 (militōnds), from which 𐌼𐌹𐌻𐌹𐍄𐍉𐌽 (militōn) has been assumed as a given (not just by me, also elsewhere).

Lacking telltale inflected forms which can only belong to an nd-stem noun (acc. sg. or gen. sg. for example) we can't be sure if this was viewed as a separate substantive - an nd-stem noun - or simply a regular participle just used substantively this one time. Unless I am much mistaken there is currently no way to tell, so it may just be simplest to keep it in mainspace. — Mnemosientje (t · c) 11:02, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

• RFV-kept. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 03:51, 28 March 2020 (UTC)