This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
On 1 August 2023, it was proposed that this article be moved from Walhaz to *Walhaz. The result of the discussion was moved. |
I disagree. If there is not enough material here yet, the article may be merged with Etymology of Vlach, which is essentially about the same word/concept. dab (ᛏ) 18:06, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
The picture of the coin is mirrored as is the faximile upon which it was created. As much as contributions are very much welcome, the contributors dealing with ancient scripts should pay more attention, I suppose.
From the article:
I'm not aware of the asterisk being (or representing) an Old German letter, and there is no reference to such on the Old High German page. There is also no footnote on this page that the asterisk might refer to. What does this asterisk represent here? -- ΨΦorg ( talk) 19:30, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
Can someone tell me why "País de Gales" (literally translated: "The Country of Wales") for "Wales" in Portuguese? And so, consequently there is the term "galês" (or, alternatively, "a língua galêsa") for the "Welsh" language? Would there be any connection or related pattern to the name "William" traditionally being translated as "Guilherme" in Portuguese? Bepp ( talk) 21:13, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
The article currently claims that "Welschhinkel" and "Welschkann" are the Penn Dutch names for Turkey and Maize respectively and that is should be literally translated as "French" grain. I'm no expert but surely the proper translation would be foreign grain as 1. maize is not french and never has been and 2. the article goes into significant depth to explain the origin of this word as essentially relating to things "foreign" to a particular group of people, the Germanic tribes. Alex McKee ( talk) 22:32, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
As a native German speaker I may perhaps be considered as a kind of "native informant". I this role I'd like to suggest to treat the word "Welscher/Welsche" as a historic word. I have never in my 52 years of earthly life come across anybody using that word, either in written or spoken German.
G. Berkemer —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.12.56.187 ( talk) 20:27, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
I am also a native German, and the word welsch is not only historical but also a more sophisticated and a little pejorative word to describe a Frenchman or an Italian.13:13, 4 January 2011 (UTC) Ampsivare ( talk)
According to the Oxford English Dictionary, Old English is the language of the Anglo-Saxons. So the meaning of wilisc in the introductory paragraph should be changed to 'foreign, non-Anglosaxon, Cymric'. The Dutch reference doesn't mean any person from England which contained Cymric people. 203.161.75.138 ( talk) 13:13, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
If "welsh" means "foreigner", why didn't the Anglo-Saxons call the Scotts and Picts as such? Nestorius Auranites ( talk) 21:09, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
"It is often claimed that the word 'Welsh' is a contemptuous word used by Germanic-speaking peoples to describe foreigners. Yet a glance at the dictionary of any of the Teutonic languages will show that that is not its only meaning. 'Welsh' was not used by Germanic speakers to describe peoples living to the east of them; to the English, walh-stod meant an interpreter, but they had a different word for a translator from Danish. It would appear that 'Welsh' meant not so much foreigners as peoples who had been Romanized; other versions of the word may be found along the borders of the Empire - the Walloons of Belgium, the Welsch of the Italian Tyrol and the Vlachs of Romania - and the welschnuss, the walnut, was the nut of the Roman lands. This recognition of the persistence of the Roman tradition is striking, particularly when it is placed alongside the continuance of the Brittonic language and its successor...."
saltare > sauter; falsus > faux; salvare > sauver; alter > autre; 118.96.143.95 ( talk) 01:15, 9 April 2010 (UTC) 118.96.143.95 ( talk) 01:15, 9 April 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.96.143.95 ( talk) 01:11, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
I am wondering if Walhalla or Valhalla (Old Norse Valhöll) also derive from Walha?! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Codrinb ( talk • contribs) 20:59, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
No, it doesn't derive from Walha. Valhöll is a composite word made from Valir which means 'slain, slaughtered' and höll which is 'palace, hall'. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jumahess ( talk • contribs) 11:05, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
There is a conundrum here: The article is about one word attested in many different forms in many different languages, but all of them ultimately, historically go back to the same proto-form *Walha- (stem) or *Walhaz (nominative singular). However, what should the article be named? I tried to fix the intro and thought of moving the article, but I'm not sure how to proceed in such a case. Should we give the article the title Walhaz even though that is a reconstructed form? Given that the articles for the runes and some other subjects, such as Germanic deities, also use reconstructed forms, for example Wodanaz, this possibility should be canvassed, but use in this area is terribly inconsistent in Wikipedia. In any event, Walh (singular) and Walha (plural) is not proto-Germanic or even simply "Germanic" or "ancient Germanic" (which doesn't exist as a unified language; you simply cannot quote unitary "Germanic" or "ancient Germanic" forms, just like you can quote Latin or reconstructed proto-Romance but not "common Romance" forms), it's simply Old High German, and that needs to be clarified. But I don't know how to structure the intro better. Anyone have any idea how to fix this? -- Florian Blaschke ( talk) 17:57, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
The section of this article which goes through all the languages needs to be re-organized. Central Europe and Western Europe are not suitable categories. It would be much better to group these linguistically. -- Doric Loon ( talk) 21:05, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
What about the Swiss Wallis/ Valais canton/region? Does it have the same root? Or is it just coming from the Vallis Poenina, the name used by Romans for the upper Rhône valley?-- Codrin.B ( talk) 19:30, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
The root of "Valais" is the Latin "vallis", with "Wallis" as its xenonym in german language. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.115.33.122 ( talk) 20:33, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
I think it would be very useful to have table like this, possible with more relevant columns: Words derived from Walhaz:
Language | Form | Meaning |
---|---|---|
English | Wales | is a country that is part of the United Kingdom |
English | Walsden | a large village in West Yorkshire, England |
German | Welschbillig | a place in the Moselle valley, where Moselle romanic was spoken |
German | Welschkohl | a German exonym meaning... |
Greek | Βλάχοι (Vlákhi/Vláhi) | Shepherd (occasionally pejorative)/Romanian/Vlach |
Bulgarian | влах | Romanian/Vlach |
Bulgarian | влах | man from Wallachia |
Czech | Valach | man from Wallachia |
Czech | Valach | man from Valašsko (in Moravia) |
Czech | valach | shepherd |
Czech | valach | gelding (horse) |
Czech | valach | lazy man |
Czech | Vlach | Italian |
Hungarian | vlach | Vlach |
Hungarian | oláh | Romanian/Vlach |
Hungarian | olasz | Italian |
Macedonian | влав | cattle breeder, shepherd |
Polish | Włoch | Italian |
Polish | Włochy | Italy |
Polish | Wołoch | Romanian / Vlach |
Polish | wałach | gelding (horse) citation needed |
Old Russian | волохъ | man speaking a Romance language |
Russian | валах | Vlach |
Serbian | Влах | citizen of the Republic of Ragusa |
Serbian, Croatian, Bosnian | Влах, Vlah | Vlach |
Serbian, Croatian, Bosnian | Влах, Vlah | man from Wallachia |
Serbian ( Užice dialect) | Вла(х), Старовла(х) | medieval nomadic people from Stari Vlah and Mala Vlaška |
Croatian | Vlah | Istro-Romanian |
Croatian ( Dubrovnik dialect) | Vlah | man from Herzegovina ( pejorative) |
Croatian (western dialects) | Vlah | Italian ( pejorative) |
Serbian and Croatian | влах, vlah | medieval nomadic cattle breeder |
Croatian (dialects of Istria) | vlah | new settler ( pejorative) |
Croatian ( Dalmatian dialects) | vlah (vlaj) | plebeian ( pejorative) |
Croatian ( Dalmatian insular dialects) | vlah | man from the mainland ( pejorative) |
Croatian (western and northern dialects) | vlah (vlaj) | Orthodox Christian, usually Serb ( pejorative) |
Croatian ( Podravina dialects) | vlah | Catholic who is a neoshtokavian speaker ( pejorative) citation needed |
Bosnian | vlah, влах | non- Muslim living in Bosnia, usually Serb ( pejorative) |
Bosnian | vlah | Catholic ( pejorative) |
Slovak | Valach | man from Wallachia |
Slovak | Valach | man from Valašsko (in Moravia) |
Slovak | valach | shepherd |
Slovak | valach | gelding (horse) |
Slovak | Vlach | Italian |
Slovene | Lah | Italian ( pejorative) |
Western Slovenian dialects | Lah | Friulian |
Slovene | Vlah | Serbian immigrant ( pejorative) citation needed |
Ukrainian | волох | Romanian / Vlach |
-- Codrin.B ( talk) 20:27, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
At one point this article says: “In English usage the words Gaul and Gaulish are used synonymously with Latin Gallia, Gallus and Gallicus. However the similarity of the names is probably accidental: the English words are borrowed from French Gaule and Gaulois, which appear to have been borrowed themselves from walha-. Germanic w is regularly rendered with French gu / g (cf. guerre = war, garder = ward), and the diphthong au is the regular outcome of al before a following consonant (cf. cheval ~ chevaux). Gaule or Gaulle can hardly be derived from Latin Gallia, since g would become j before a (cf. gamba > jambe), the regular outcome of Latin Gallia would have been *Jaille in French.[4][5] This also applies to the French name for Wales, which is le pays de Galles.” At another point it says: “In most Oïl languages[9] and Irish, walhaz was borrowed and altered by changing the initial w to g (cf. English "war" French guerre, English "William" vs. French Guillaume or even English "ward" vs. "guard", borrowed into English from French) resulting in Gaul- : Gaule "Gaul", Gaulois "Gaulish"”. These paragraphs appear to be contradictary. Is Gaul related to Gallia, or not? Intelligent Mr Toad ( talk) 08:17, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
"Welsch" is not used pejorative and is only reserved for francophone regions. The French term "Romandie" and the german term "Welschschweiz" are identical and define areas instead of political territories, since some cantons are bilingual. Corresponding to that, French and german speakers use different names for municipalities, for example "Sion" vs. "Sitten" or "Neuchâtel" vs. "Neuenburg". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.115.33.122 ( talk) 21:12, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
The text that read:
Similarly the corresponding Hebrew root "la'az" or "lo'ez", literally meaning "foreign", is used of the Judeo-Italian languages and of vocabulary of Romance origin in Yiddish. In the Talmudic commentaries of Rashi and the Tosafists, the translations of individual words into Old French are known as lo'azim.
is both factually inaccurate and irrelevant here. The Hebrew "la'az" -- לעע״ז -- is not a root. It is rather a Hebrew Abbreviation, namely, an acronym for "לשון עבדי עבודה זרה". Its literal meaning is "language of the performers of strange worship" (i.e., the language of idolaters/infidels). It is indeed commonly used to refer to translations of obscure Hebrew words into Old French by Rashi in his commentaries -- though not only in the Talmud but elsewhere as well. As Rashi lived in France, it was natural for him to use French as a reference for rendering complex terms. Being not a proper native root, it is irrelevant to the discussion of the subject of this page. Saparagus ( talk) 18:11, 16 November 2013 (UTC) Saparagus Arbiter
Re https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Walhaz&curid=1274120&diff=657054077&oldid=654884741 Based on what I can find e.g. http://abdn.ac.uk/skaldic/m.php?p=word&i=90526 and http://web.ff.cuni.cz/cgi-bin/uaa_slovnik/gmc_search_v3?cmd=formquery2&query=Valskr&startrow=1 'French' seems a more supportable interpretation of 'valskr' than 'Gaul'. Ewx ( talk) 08:18, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Walhaz. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:06, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
I see that the article has been tagged for some time with:
It seems to me that the content extends beyond the scope of the article title - and is convuluted. It seems as if the article should be rewritten. My suggestion is to remove all uncited content in sections and build the article from there.
To figure that out, I think it's important to determine if the scope of the article should include words derived from Walhaz.
Are there any thoughts about this?– CaroleHenson ( talk) 04:59, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
@ Sirfurboy: Regarding "To your question on the notable people, I would start by looking here: [6]"
- I don't know how, but I am unable to find anything about notable people in this link - Also, it's a blog and does not appear to be a reliable source
I could be missing something. I would really like to cite this section - otherwise, it should probably be removed. – CaroleHenson ( talk) 16:01, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
I will take a look at this list and see what I can find:
– CaroleHenson ( talk) 16:44, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: moved. Rough consensus to move; while the !votes in support and opposition were roughly equal, consensus is not determined by counting votes but by strength of argument. In that light, those in support had the strongest arguments, arguing that this is what the words are called in sources.
Arguments in opposition, in comparison, had little basis in policy, such as arguing that titles starting with a * were technically problematic.
Editors who believe that the words are not notable should bring the article to WP:AFD; notability has no bearing on what the title of the article should be. ( closed by non-admin page mover) BilledMammal ( talk) 13:23, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
– WP:COMMONNAME. It is customary in historical linguistics to include an asterisk at the beginning of a word that is not attested in writing, but rather reconstructed etymologically. Jcitawy made a technical request to move Walhaz → *Walhaz. In order to maintain consistent titling, I have expanded this to cover each article in Category:Reconstructed words (except Jehovah and Yahweh, due to common usage). I also included changes to Heryomen, Pehuson, and Perkwunos to use more precise reconstructed spellings like the others (see Proto-Indo-European phonology). These are all Proto-Indo-European or Proto-Germanic, unless I am mistaken. SilverLocust 💬 13:23, 1 August 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. BilledMammal ( talk) 14:54, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
*
and \?
, and both can come in the middle or end of a word" (emphasis added), so I'm assuming that an initial asterisk doesn't harm searches. I didn't face issues when searching
*Lisp for example. Here's a list of articles with initial asterisk on Wikipedia
[9]. —
CX Zoom[he/him] (
let's talk • {
C•
X})
08:42, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
On 1 August 2023, it was proposed that this article be moved from Walhaz to *Walhaz. The result of the discussion was moved. |
I disagree. If there is not enough material here yet, the article may be merged with Etymology of Vlach, which is essentially about the same word/concept. dab (ᛏ) 18:06, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
The picture of the coin is mirrored as is the faximile upon which it was created. As much as contributions are very much welcome, the contributors dealing with ancient scripts should pay more attention, I suppose.
From the article:
I'm not aware of the asterisk being (or representing) an Old German letter, and there is no reference to such on the Old High German page. There is also no footnote on this page that the asterisk might refer to. What does this asterisk represent here? -- ΨΦorg ( talk) 19:30, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
Can someone tell me why "País de Gales" (literally translated: "The Country of Wales") for "Wales" in Portuguese? And so, consequently there is the term "galês" (or, alternatively, "a língua galêsa") for the "Welsh" language? Would there be any connection or related pattern to the name "William" traditionally being translated as "Guilherme" in Portuguese? Bepp ( talk) 21:13, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
The article currently claims that "Welschhinkel" and "Welschkann" are the Penn Dutch names for Turkey and Maize respectively and that is should be literally translated as "French" grain. I'm no expert but surely the proper translation would be foreign grain as 1. maize is not french and never has been and 2. the article goes into significant depth to explain the origin of this word as essentially relating to things "foreign" to a particular group of people, the Germanic tribes. Alex McKee ( talk) 22:32, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
As a native German speaker I may perhaps be considered as a kind of "native informant". I this role I'd like to suggest to treat the word "Welscher/Welsche" as a historic word. I have never in my 52 years of earthly life come across anybody using that word, either in written or spoken German.
G. Berkemer —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.12.56.187 ( talk) 20:27, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
I am also a native German, and the word welsch is not only historical but also a more sophisticated and a little pejorative word to describe a Frenchman or an Italian.13:13, 4 January 2011 (UTC) Ampsivare ( talk)
According to the Oxford English Dictionary, Old English is the language of the Anglo-Saxons. So the meaning of wilisc in the introductory paragraph should be changed to 'foreign, non-Anglosaxon, Cymric'. The Dutch reference doesn't mean any person from England which contained Cymric people. 203.161.75.138 ( talk) 13:13, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
If "welsh" means "foreigner", why didn't the Anglo-Saxons call the Scotts and Picts as such? Nestorius Auranites ( talk) 21:09, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
"It is often claimed that the word 'Welsh' is a contemptuous word used by Germanic-speaking peoples to describe foreigners. Yet a glance at the dictionary of any of the Teutonic languages will show that that is not its only meaning. 'Welsh' was not used by Germanic speakers to describe peoples living to the east of them; to the English, walh-stod meant an interpreter, but they had a different word for a translator from Danish. It would appear that 'Welsh' meant not so much foreigners as peoples who had been Romanized; other versions of the word may be found along the borders of the Empire - the Walloons of Belgium, the Welsch of the Italian Tyrol and the Vlachs of Romania - and the welschnuss, the walnut, was the nut of the Roman lands. This recognition of the persistence of the Roman tradition is striking, particularly when it is placed alongside the continuance of the Brittonic language and its successor...."
saltare > sauter; falsus > faux; salvare > sauver; alter > autre; 118.96.143.95 ( talk) 01:15, 9 April 2010 (UTC) 118.96.143.95 ( talk) 01:15, 9 April 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.96.143.95 ( talk) 01:11, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
I am wondering if Walhalla or Valhalla (Old Norse Valhöll) also derive from Walha?! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Codrinb ( talk • contribs) 20:59, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
No, it doesn't derive from Walha. Valhöll is a composite word made from Valir which means 'slain, slaughtered' and höll which is 'palace, hall'. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jumahess ( talk • contribs) 11:05, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
There is a conundrum here: The article is about one word attested in many different forms in many different languages, but all of them ultimately, historically go back to the same proto-form *Walha- (stem) or *Walhaz (nominative singular). However, what should the article be named? I tried to fix the intro and thought of moving the article, but I'm not sure how to proceed in such a case. Should we give the article the title Walhaz even though that is a reconstructed form? Given that the articles for the runes and some other subjects, such as Germanic deities, also use reconstructed forms, for example Wodanaz, this possibility should be canvassed, but use in this area is terribly inconsistent in Wikipedia. In any event, Walh (singular) and Walha (plural) is not proto-Germanic or even simply "Germanic" or "ancient Germanic" (which doesn't exist as a unified language; you simply cannot quote unitary "Germanic" or "ancient Germanic" forms, just like you can quote Latin or reconstructed proto-Romance but not "common Romance" forms), it's simply Old High German, and that needs to be clarified. But I don't know how to structure the intro better. Anyone have any idea how to fix this? -- Florian Blaschke ( talk) 17:57, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
The section of this article which goes through all the languages needs to be re-organized. Central Europe and Western Europe are not suitable categories. It would be much better to group these linguistically. -- Doric Loon ( talk) 21:05, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
What about the Swiss Wallis/ Valais canton/region? Does it have the same root? Or is it just coming from the Vallis Poenina, the name used by Romans for the upper Rhône valley?-- Codrin.B ( talk) 19:30, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
The root of "Valais" is the Latin "vallis", with "Wallis" as its xenonym in german language. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.115.33.122 ( talk) 20:33, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
I think it would be very useful to have table like this, possible with more relevant columns: Words derived from Walhaz:
Language | Form | Meaning |
---|---|---|
English | Wales | is a country that is part of the United Kingdom |
English | Walsden | a large village in West Yorkshire, England |
German | Welschbillig | a place in the Moselle valley, where Moselle romanic was spoken |
German | Welschkohl | a German exonym meaning... |
Greek | Βλάχοι (Vlákhi/Vláhi) | Shepherd (occasionally pejorative)/Romanian/Vlach |
Bulgarian | влах | Romanian/Vlach |
Bulgarian | влах | man from Wallachia |
Czech | Valach | man from Wallachia |
Czech | Valach | man from Valašsko (in Moravia) |
Czech | valach | shepherd |
Czech | valach | gelding (horse) |
Czech | valach | lazy man |
Czech | Vlach | Italian |
Hungarian | vlach | Vlach |
Hungarian | oláh | Romanian/Vlach |
Hungarian | olasz | Italian |
Macedonian | влав | cattle breeder, shepherd |
Polish | Włoch | Italian |
Polish | Włochy | Italy |
Polish | Wołoch | Romanian / Vlach |
Polish | wałach | gelding (horse) citation needed |
Old Russian | волохъ | man speaking a Romance language |
Russian | валах | Vlach |
Serbian | Влах | citizen of the Republic of Ragusa |
Serbian, Croatian, Bosnian | Влах, Vlah | Vlach |
Serbian, Croatian, Bosnian | Влах, Vlah | man from Wallachia |
Serbian ( Užice dialect) | Вла(х), Старовла(х) | medieval nomadic people from Stari Vlah and Mala Vlaška |
Croatian | Vlah | Istro-Romanian |
Croatian ( Dubrovnik dialect) | Vlah | man from Herzegovina ( pejorative) |
Croatian (western dialects) | Vlah | Italian ( pejorative) |
Serbian and Croatian | влах, vlah | medieval nomadic cattle breeder |
Croatian (dialects of Istria) | vlah | new settler ( pejorative) |
Croatian ( Dalmatian dialects) | vlah (vlaj) | plebeian ( pejorative) |
Croatian ( Dalmatian insular dialects) | vlah | man from the mainland ( pejorative) |
Croatian (western and northern dialects) | vlah (vlaj) | Orthodox Christian, usually Serb ( pejorative) |
Croatian ( Podravina dialects) | vlah | Catholic who is a neoshtokavian speaker ( pejorative) citation needed |
Bosnian | vlah, влах | non- Muslim living in Bosnia, usually Serb ( pejorative) |
Bosnian | vlah | Catholic ( pejorative) |
Slovak | Valach | man from Wallachia |
Slovak | Valach | man from Valašsko (in Moravia) |
Slovak | valach | shepherd |
Slovak | valach | gelding (horse) |
Slovak | Vlach | Italian |
Slovene | Lah | Italian ( pejorative) |
Western Slovenian dialects | Lah | Friulian |
Slovene | Vlah | Serbian immigrant ( pejorative) citation needed |
Ukrainian | волох | Romanian / Vlach |
-- Codrin.B ( talk) 20:27, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
At one point this article says: “In English usage the words Gaul and Gaulish are used synonymously with Latin Gallia, Gallus and Gallicus. However the similarity of the names is probably accidental: the English words are borrowed from French Gaule and Gaulois, which appear to have been borrowed themselves from walha-. Germanic w is regularly rendered with French gu / g (cf. guerre = war, garder = ward), and the diphthong au is the regular outcome of al before a following consonant (cf. cheval ~ chevaux). Gaule or Gaulle can hardly be derived from Latin Gallia, since g would become j before a (cf. gamba > jambe), the regular outcome of Latin Gallia would have been *Jaille in French.[4][5] This also applies to the French name for Wales, which is le pays de Galles.” At another point it says: “In most Oïl languages[9] and Irish, walhaz was borrowed and altered by changing the initial w to g (cf. English "war" French guerre, English "William" vs. French Guillaume or even English "ward" vs. "guard", borrowed into English from French) resulting in Gaul- : Gaule "Gaul", Gaulois "Gaulish"”. These paragraphs appear to be contradictary. Is Gaul related to Gallia, or not? Intelligent Mr Toad ( talk) 08:17, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
"Welsch" is not used pejorative and is only reserved for francophone regions. The French term "Romandie" and the german term "Welschschweiz" are identical and define areas instead of political territories, since some cantons are bilingual. Corresponding to that, French and german speakers use different names for municipalities, for example "Sion" vs. "Sitten" or "Neuchâtel" vs. "Neuenburg". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.115.33.122 ( talk) 21:12, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
The text that read:
Similarly the corresponding Hebrew root "la'az" or "lo'ez", literally meaning "foreign", is used of the Judeo-Italian languages and of vocabulary of Romance origin in Yiddish. In the Talmudic commentaries of Rashi and the Tosafists, the translations of individual words into Old French are known as lo'azim.
is both factually inaccurate and irrelevant here. The Hebrew "la'az" -- לעע״ז -- is not a root. It is rather a Hebrew Abbreviation, namely, an acronym for "לשון עבדי עבודה זרה". Its literal meaning is "language of the performers of strange worship" (i.e., the language of idolaters/infidels). It is indeed commonly used to refer to translations of obscure Hebrew words into Old French by Rashi in his commentaries -- though not only in the Talmud but elsewhere as well. As Rashi lived in France, it was natural for him to use French as a reference for rendering complex terms. Being not a proper native root, it is irrelevant to the discussion of the subject of this page. Saparagus ( talk) 18:11, 16 November 2013 (UTC) Saparagus Arbiter
Re https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Walhaz&curid=1274120&diff=657054077&oldid=654884741 Based on what I can find e.g. http://abdn.ac.uk/skaldic/m.php?p=word&i=90526 and http://web.ff.cuni.cz/cgi-bin/uaa_slovnik/gmc_search_v3?cmd=formquery2&query=Valskr&startrow=1 'French' seems a more supportable interpretation of 'valskr' than 'Gaul'. Ewx ( talk) 08:18, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Walhaz. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:06, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
I see that the article has been tagged for some time with:
It seems to me that the content extends beyond the scope of the article title - and is convuluted. It seems as if the article should be rewritten. My suggestion is to remove all uncited content in sections and build the article from there.
To figure that out, I think it's important to determine if the scope of the article should include words derived from Walhaz.
Are there any thoughts about this?– CaroleHenson ( talk) 04:59, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
@ Sirfurboy: Regarding "To your question on the notable people, I would start by looking here: [6]"
- I don't know how, but I am unable to find anything about notable people in this link - Also, it's a blog and does not appear to be a reliable source
I could be missing something. I would really like to cite this section - otherwise, it should probably be removed. – CaroleHenson ( talk) 16:01, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
I will take a look at this list and see what I can find:
– CaroleHenson ( talk) 16:44, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: moved. Rough consensus to move; while the !votes in support and opposition were roughly equal, consensus is not determined by counting votes but by strength of argument. In that light, those in support had the strongest arguments, arguing that this is what the words are called in sources.
Arguments in opposition, in comparison, had little basis in policy, such as arguing that titles starting with a * were technically problematic.
Editors who believe that the words are not notable should bring the article to WP:AFD; notability has no bearing on what the title of the article should be. ( closed by non-admin page mover) BilledMammal ( talk) 13:23, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
– WP:COMMONNAME. It is customary in historical linguistics to include an asterisk at the beginning of a word that is not attested in writing, but rather reconstructed etymologically. Jcitawy made a technical request to move Walhaz → *Walhaz. In order to maintain consistent titling, I have expanded this to cover each article in Category:Reconstructed words (except Jehovah and Yahweh, due to common usage). I also included changes to Heryomen, Pehuson, and Perkwunos to use more precise reconstructed spellings like the others (see Proto-Indo-European phonology). These are all Proto-Indo-European or Proto-Germanic, unless I am mistaken. SilverLocust 💬 13:23, 1 August 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. BilledMammal ( talk) 14:54, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
*
and \?
, and both can come in the middle or end of a word" (emphasis added), so I'm assuming that an initial asterisk doesn't harm searches. I didn't face issues when searching
*Lisp for example. Here's a list of articles with initial asterisk on Wikipedia
[9]. —
CX Zoom[he/him] (
let's talk • {
C•
X})
08:42, 2 August 2023 (UTC)