Talk:飼

Etymology

@Wyang Neither pronunciation data given by och-l belongs to 飼／饲 (sì) though. I don't think use och-l is a good idea. Dokurrat (talk) 12:07, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

I'm not sure I understand what you mean... but anyway, I don't think it's important. Wyang (talk) 12:12, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

@Wyang: Oh... *lɯɡs = 食#Etymology 3, *ɦljɯɡ= 食#Etymology 1. I think the OCH pronunciation of 飼 should = 食#Etymology 2 (which did not give a Zhengzhang restruction, which I think would be *ljɯs). That's what I meant. Dokurrat (talk) 12:16, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

When I used och-l, I actually meant the main pronunciation of 食 ("to eat"), since 飼 ("to feed") is derived from that. But it is not important - the reconstructions are a bit confusing anyway. Wyang (talk) 12:25, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

@Wyang: The Zhengzhang's reconstruction has been updated in second edition. (https://www.amazon.cn/dp/B00HF43F60) The explanation might have been changed there. So may I ask if you can check the 2nd? (Unfortunately I don't have the 2nd Edition.It's in section S.)--Yoshiciv (talk) 07:57, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

@Yoshiciv Yes, I'm still waiting for someone to kindly key in the data and share them online. Please let me know if you (or anyone) is aware of such resource. Wyang (talk) 08:17, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

@Wyang: I've checked the second edition. The reconstruction of "/*ljɯs/ 同飤見書孔傳" is unchanged, though another reconstruction, maybe "sɦljɯɡs", is added.--Yoshiciv (talk) 08:07, 5 June 2018 (UTC)