User talk:Rhyminreason

Welcome

Hello, welcome to Wiktionary, and thank you for your contributions so far.

If you are unfamiliar with wiki-editing, take a look at Help:How to edit a page. It is a concise list of technical guidelines to the wiki format we use here: how to, for example, make text boldfaced or create hyperlinks. Feel free to practice in the sandbox. If you would like a slower introduction we have a short tutorial.

These links may help you familiarize yourself with Wiktionary:

• Entry layout (EL) is a detailed policy on Wiktionary's page formatting; all entries must conform to it. The easiest way to start off is to copy the contents of an existing same-language entry, and then adapt it to fit the entry you are creating.
• Check out Language considerations to find out more about how to edit for a particular language.
• Our Criteria for Inclusion (CFI) defines exactly which words can be added to Wiktionary; the most important part is that Wiktionary only accepts words that have been in somewhat widespread use over the course of at least a year, and citations that demonstrate usage can be asked for when there is doubt.
• If you already have some experience with editing our sister project Wikipedia, then you may find our guide for Wikipedia users useful.
• If you have any questions, bring them to Wiktionary:Information desk or ask me on my talk page.
• Whenever commenting on any discussion page, please sign your posts with four tildes (~~~~) which automatically produces your username and timestamp.
• You are encouraged to add a BabelBox to your userpage to indicate your self-assessed knowledge of languages.

Enjoy your stay at Wiktionary! --Per utramque cavernam (talk) 13:55, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Warning

Please stop disrupting the Etymology Scriptorium with non-sequitur speculation, as you did here.

You've been called out at least three times for this before. mellohi! (僕の乖離) 17:25, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Raison d'etre

@Rhyminreason, what are you doing here? Paul G's query at the start of this thread is trivial to look into, and yet all you've done is respond with (what appears to me as) ungrounded nonsense. I ask out of curiosity and honest confusion -- what are you hoping to accomplish here, at Wiktionary? ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 22:45, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

@Eirikr: I took the liberty to move your question to my talk page, because it was off-topic at the tea room and only directed at me.

However, I choose to ignore it, just as you choose to ignore my statement about the comparability, which already answered your question about that.

Maybe I will answer later. Rhyminreason (talk) 00:43, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

PS: Unfortunately I messed up the ping before. Rhyminreason (talk) 12:02, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Warning No. 2

Please stop disrupting the Tea Room, as you did here.

You've been called out at least six times for disruption before. mellohi! (僕の乖離) 01:37, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

On another note, your attempts at pinging Eirikr here failed because you used his signature instead of his actual username. 01:41, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

@Hillcrest98 Of what are you warning me, Unintended consequences? Rhyminreason (talk) 15:13, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

I have noticed that you are continuing to add nonsense to multiple forum pages, despite being warned, having it explained to you, and having your additions reverted. What you're being warned of now is that if you continue in this vein, you will be blocked. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 00:30, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

@metaknowledge: On the risk of more nonsense, let me ask, which meaning of nonsense is it? Rhyminreason (talk) 19:11, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

This blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed:

Rhyminreason (block log • active blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • user creation log • change block settings • unblock)

---

Request reason:

Meta is reverting me on sight, blocking me now with a blanket statement. The latest revert accompinying the block is a pre-judgement in a discussion of languages without speaking the necessary language, on account of other users who's conduct is no less disruptive. Here a post to the etymology scriptorium was reverted with the suggestion to post an eymologic question to the tea room instead. I feel there is a strong preoccupation against me. I attempted to discuss prior reverts on my talk page only to be ignored. This is unacceptable. I know there are a few good admins around here, who don't honour fool language, however carefully it's worded. I hope those will read it. The block is only for a day, yes -- this time. Unblocking should be a sign. Yes, I am not yet an active editor: Quite frankly, in this atmosphere I don't think it will be worth the hassle to become one.

कान्हा (kānhā)

It's obviously from कृष्ण (kŕṣṇa), which you would be able to tell if you had looked at any reliable source. The development is regular: kŕṣṇa > Prakrit kaṇṇa > Old Hindi kān(h)ā > Hindi kānhā. Your ideas have no basis in the sound laws that govern Indo-Aryan language development, not to mention linking it to the word you did is kind of offensive. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 16:34, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

@AryamanA: There's a reasonable reply in your comment. My question is helpful because it revealed that the etymology at कान्हा (kānhā) could be improved a) with the intermediate step and b) with the appropriate sources. If that's the case, why would that information have been too much to ask for? Rhyminreason (talk) 09:49, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

@AryamanA: Thanks for your translation. I have to admit, My first guess was हर्रे (harre) looks like a pictograph of a rabbit, so, yeah, I can be outright paranoid at times. It's only fair if you all are highly skeptic in return. Now that I saw those "ears" are quite common in devangari script, I don't really think so anymore. Google translate only gave the transcription "harre", so my imagination was kindled, likening it to hare.

However, in the meantime I found that h?r- in some form describes bright colors in PIE and Sanskrit. Incidentally, the fruit w:Terminalia_arjuna (via w:Myrobalans) looks goldish and the byname arjuna attess to that.

In other news, McGregor has कान्ह glossed also as "black". I don't know if you read the reverted comment -- that one explains my hypothesis a bit. So this was really not so much about religion. I might be provocative, but I didn't mean to offend anyone. I hope you accept my apology. Rhyminreason (talk) 10:29, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

It's okay, I'm sure you did not mean to offend. As for your theories, Devanagari is not pictographic or logographic, it is an abugida, somewhat like a syllabary. The word हर्रे (harre) can be split into ह (ha) + र (ra) + ् (vowel killer) + र (ra) + े (e). *h is not a phoneme in Proto-Indo-European (PIE), so I do not know what you mean; maybe you're talking about *h₁, *h₂, *h₃, which are called "laryngeals" in PIE, but these were historically lost in Sanskrit and can never lead to the actual ह (ha) sound. The word हर्रे (harre) (which as far as I know is an obsolete or regional form of हड़ (haṛ)) is from Sanskrit हरीतक (harītaka, literally “that which is green”), from हरित (harita, “green”). So you're on the right track, but not totally there.

कान्हा (kānhā) / कान्ह (kānha) probably did mean "black" historically, (as did their ancestor Sanskrit कृष्ण (kṛṣṇa)), but that meaning is obsolete now. There's no relation to Hindi काली (kālī) or काला (kālā).

I advise you to not pose your own theories without having a solid grasp of the scholarly research that goes into established etymologies. Too many mistakes can be made in that manner. —Aryaman^{A (मुझसे बात करें • योगदान)} 00:00, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

Your speculative screeds

Wiktionary's fora are for building the dictionary and improving it. Nothing more, nothing less. Your baseless and absurd etymological proposals do nothing but waste our time, as I have already explained to you. You need to stop posting them. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 17:36, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

It appears that you don't understand what "sum of parts" means. Stop wasting other people's time. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 22:18, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

@Metaknowledge: I believe the phrase "kill it with fire" originates from an online meme (or trope, or whatever you want to call it, you know what I mean) around disgusting spiders, in which case the expression is not figurative but merely exageration. I can only guess that not figurative is the part of the definition at sum of parts which you wanted to point out. Is that correct?

Generally, your reverts are sometimes reasonable, I have to admit, as far as I am open to critique. But your form of critique raises criticism, too. It's kind of lazy. You seem to try to be objective and patient as much as possible and I try to respect that, but it makes me curios. Frankly I'm a bit worried that you are overreacting.

Could you explain your objection to the question on the etymology of Hindi kanha (diff)? Likewise, the question for the difference between *flatas and *flakas was likely valid, even if packed in fluff. Etc. etc.

Also, you indirectly calling Starostin a "crackpot" borders on defamation. I mean, the compilation is useful; Reconstructions are inherently probabilistic, so that they are unlikely is a given, but that doesn't invalidate the work as unscientific, if just a small share has some chance of being true.

Rhyminreason (talk) 01:39, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

Excessive Block

Please, someone repeal the block duration, it's unreasonable (diff). A month would be excessive but OK, maybe a year, but not indefinite. Rhyminreason (talk) 22:48, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

@Chuck_Entz: Wyang complained about being kept from work, so I don't think it right to bother that blocking admin any further. Since you are actively monitoring for problematic users, I'll have to ask you first to review this -- also because you commented before. I'd like to defend myself as a last resort, if that's OK. Rhyminreason (talk) 18:34, 27 May 2018 (UTC)