False cognates

[zyma]

Same with hej (or hej, hej) in Swedish and some other corresponding colloquial forms like tja (surprisingly similar to ciao – I wonder if there is some connection there).

Also Hebrew "Shalom" and Hawaiin "aloha"

Don't false cognates have to sound alike?

Edit: Unless you're saying that because they both have <alo>?

[Shemtov]

Same with hej (or hej, hej) in Swedish and some other corresponding colloquial forms like tja (surprisingly similar to ciao – I wonder if there is some connection there).

Also Hebrew "Shalom" and Hawaiin "aloha"

Don't false cognates have to sound alike?

Edit: Unless you're saying that because they both have <alo>?

No, I was addressing the tangent that Sko was taking about words meaning "hello" AND "Goodbye"

[Lao Kou]

Since loanwords share an etymological source, why wouldn't they be considered cognates?

So English "sushi" and Japanese "sushi" are cognates?

[zyma]

Since loanwords share an etymological source, why wouldn't they be considered cognates?

So English "sushi" and Japanese "sushi" are cognates?

I think I spoke too soon before. This last question of yours has made me really think about this kind of situation, and for me, it's very complicated, much more so than I thought before.

From my point of view, sushi and sushi are not cognates, because the English word is a direct borrowing of the Japanese word. They do share the same etymological source, which was, until now, my definition of a cognate, but the etymological relationship between the two words is different than the one between, say, hundred and centum. I'm not sure I can say exactly what that difference is, but here's my theory. Those two words are both descendants of a common ancestor, PIE *ḱm̥tóm, unlike the two "sushi"s, where the Japanese word is essentially the ancestor of the English word. You could most definitely argue that they are, in fact, cognates, but now that I really have to think about it, calling them that doesn't feel right to me, personally.

So I wouldn't call them cognates. However, I wouldn't call them false cognates either. While I would no longer define two words from different languages as cognates simply because they share an etymological source, I stand by my definition of false cognate, at least for now. Two words that, coincidentally, sound similar and have similar meanings are false cognates, in my opinion. The similarity between the English and Japanese word sushi is no coincidence. I wouldn't call them false cognates, because the reason for their similarity can be demonstrated, but I wouldn't call them cognates either, since the English word is borrowed from the Japanese word. Similarly, if a language borrows the Italian word ciao in some form, that word is neither a cognate nor false cognate with ciao, from my point of view.

I hope I made myself clear.

[Lao Kou]

I hope I made myself clear.

Yes, and you've explained what I've understood the definitions of "cognate" and "false cognate" to be. Feel the agreement. Feel the zen.

[qwed117]

deus, theos, Nahuatl teotl (god) has already been said, and I think deus->theos is a true cognate originating from a PIE, (devas in Indic languages)

[zyma]

deus and devá are cognates, but neither one is cognate to theós, surprisingly.

deus and devá are both descendants of *deywós. theós is descended from *dʰh₁s-, a derivative of *dʰeh₁-, which makes theós a cognate of Latin fēriae, fānum, and fēstus (and English do and Latin faciō), but not deus and devá.

However, since *deywós is a derivative of *dyew-, deus and devá are related to Greek Zeús, and Latin Iuppiter and diēs.

So deus and theós are, in fact, false cognates.

[qwed117]

Interesting, I never would've suspected that.

[HinGambleGoth]

Same with hej (or hej, hej) in Swedish and some other corresponding colloquial forms like tja (surprisingly similar to ciao – I wonder if there is some connection there).

"tja" is a contracted form of "tjenare" which is the Stockholm form of "tjänare" (notice the typical Stockholm vowel merger)
"tjänare" means "servant", and the original form of the phrase was "(min) ödmjuke tjänare" literally "my humble servant".

[Prinsessa]

the original form of the phrase was "(min) ödmjuke tjänare" literally "my humble servant"

That has always felt like a really weird folk etymology to me. Can it really be verified?

[zyma]

the original form of the phrase was "(min) ödmjuke tjänare" literally "my humble servant"

That has always felt like a really weird folk etymology to me. Can it really be verified?

Wikipedia says that Italian (etc.) word ciao comes from the Venetian phrase s-ciào su "I am your slave".

These etymologies do sound very strange to me, but I'm inclined to believe them. The similar origins of the two words/phrases seem to me to be plausible since they were not meant literally. Not to say I can truly verify either one, though.

[Xonen]

the original form of the phrase was "(min) ödmjuke tjänare" literally "my humble servant"

That has always felt like a really weird folk etymology to me. Can it really be verified?

Wikipedia says that Italian (etc.) word ciao comes from the Venetian phrase s-ciào su "I am your slave".

These etymologies do sound very strange to me, but I'm inclined to believe them. The similar origins of the two words/phrases seem to me to be plausible since they were not meant literally. Not to say I can truly verify either one, though.

There's also Hungarian szervusz, on which Wiktionary says:

The greeting evolved from the commoners’ greeting (said to lords) servus humillimus (Domine spectabilis), meaning your humble servant, my noble Lord. No subservience is implied in modern use. Compare Slovak, Romanian or German servus.

And I must say I don't find anything particularly odd about that etymology. I mean, of course you get odd looks from young people these days if you demand that they address you as "my Lord" and follow proper protocol in general (*sigh*) - but things were different before all this pansy modern liberté-égalité-fraternité nonsense. I blame the French.

[Prinsessa]

how can you blame those who speak the language from which the term "T-V distinction" comes from

blame scandinavia

that sort of crap is gone here

[Shemtov]

deus and devá are cognates, but neither one is cognate to theós, surprisingly.

deus and devá are both descendants of *deywós. theós is descended from *dʰh₁s-, a derivative of *dʰeh₁-, which makes theós a cognate of Latin fēriae, fānum, and fēstus (and English do and Latin faciō), but not deus and devá.

However, since *deywós is a derivative of *dyew-, deus and devá are related to Greek Zeús, and Latin Iuppiter and diēs.

So deus and theós are, in fact, false cognates.

That makes sense, because if Deva was cognate with Theos, it would be Dheva, with a breathy d.

[Prinsessa]

And Tyr would be Dyr.

[Xonen]

how can you blame those who speak the language from which the term "T-V distinction" comes from

If you're asking why I think liberté-égalité-fraternité might have something to do with the French, I'm afraid I can't really come up with a terribly clever answer. (Also, at least Wikipedia claims that the term "T-V distinction" actually comes from Latin, although I'll admit I would have blamed the French for that as well had I not checked.)

[GrandPiano]

How about English "give" and Mandarin "gěi" (traditional 給, simplified 给)?

[Prinsessa]

how can you blame those who speak the language from which the term "T-V distinction" comes from

If you're asking why I think liberté-égalité-fraternité might have something to do with the French, I'm afraid I can't really come up with a terribly clever answer. (Also, at least Wikipedia claims that the term "T-V distinction" actually comes from Latin, although I'll admit I would have blamed the French for that as well had I not checked.)

Oh, well. I wonder what the actual situation looks like in France now anyway.

[k1234567890y]

English cheat and :roc: :zho: Mandarin Chinese 欺 /t͡ɕʰi˥˥/("to cheat, to doublecross, to deceive"), both of them have meanings connected to some types dishonest behaviors.

How about English "give" and Mandarin "gěi" (traditional 給, simplified 给)?

good example :)

[clawgrip]

Not false cognates, just a weird coincidence, but where else am I going to post this

English "to" and "two" essentially translate to Japanese "ni" and "ni". It's just a weird coincidence that they are homonyms of each other in both languages.