Reconstruction talk:Proto-Germanic/aiwaz

Adverbs

@Benwing2, Leasnam, Holodwig21: There should be a separate page for the adverb meaning "ever, always", but I'm having difficulty reconciling the forms. Old Norse æ and ey clearly point to an umlauting factor, so *aiwi, but Old English ā lacks umlaut, pointing to *aiwą or even just *aiw. Gothic aiw meanwhile doesn't tell us anything about the final vowel. —Rua (mew) 17:48, 28 December 2019 (UTC)

@Rua: mmm, I'm not really sure on what the Adverb form is. But i'm leaning more to *aiwi with the rest being secondary formation. 𐌷𐌻𐌿𐌳𐌰𐍅𐌹𐌲𐍃 𐌰𐌻𐌰𐍂𐌴𐌹𐌺𐌹𐌲𐌲𐍃 (talk) 21:58, 28 December 2019 (UTC)

Negation of this to form a lexeme for "never"?

@AquaticCitrus2035, Audawiniz, Eremitgnutten, Holodwig21, JohnC5, Moonspell Bloodlines, Mårtensås, Rua, TheSilverWolf98, Zedeurre: Can we assume that the root "aiw" was used together with *ne or *ni to form a lexeme for "never"? So far I've seen references to *nai in the etymology of various germanic languages, but that doesn't seem to derive properly from "aiw". — This unsigned comment was added by RayZa (talk • contribs) at 12:45, 5 January 2021 (UTC).

@RayZa Absolutely, for example, ni aiw is a standard way of saying 'never' in Gothic and Old Saxon neo is an example where this became one word. Whether the phrase could be used with the same meaning in Proto-Germanic can't be known for sure, but it seems quite possible. — Mnemosientje (t · c) 12:51, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

@Mnemosientje Hm. I see. Assuming it was a thing, one would use the adverb isn't it? I wonder whether one would use "ne" or "ni" before that.

I'm trying to figure out all the PG forms that would lead to the words for "no" (as opposed to "yes") in the modern Germanic languages. RayZa (talk) 13:31, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

I wouldn't be opposed to an entry for it, but perhaps we should consider if it's not really SOP in Proto-Germanic. —Rua (mew) 16:19, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

What would we need in order to be able to tell whether we could construct such an entry? (Probably with morphemes separated by space since apparently Gothic still had them separated.) --RayZa (talk) 11:42, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

I think we could do with an entry for the adverbial form reflected in Gothic aiw, which is discussed in the previous section too. Unfortunately it's not totally clear what that form was. —Rua (mew) 12:47, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

'Law'

User:Rua commented that the meaning 'law' may be only West Germanic (implausible, given the same meaning of the root in other IE languages), but in any case the fact is that Kroonen considers it Proto-Germanic. Next User:Victar removed it with no explanation at all. I don't really get what norms guide Wiktionary with respect to Original Research, but if they involve just overriding serious academic sources based on what individual editors feel is plausible, that seems silly. 87.126.21.225 16:05, 17 September 2022 (UTC)