The CBB

Creyeditor wrote: ↑12 Jul 2018 00:19

shimobaatar wrote: ↑12 Jul 2018 00:17 Does /ᵐb/ derive from *mb?

Ultimately not, no

Does it derive from a sequence of a nasal and an obstruent?

shimobaatar wrote: ↑12 Jul 2018 00:23

Creyeditor wrote: ↑12 Jul 2018 00:19

shimobaatar wrote: ↑12 Jul 2018 00:17 Does /ᵐb/ derive from *mb?

Ultimately not, no

Does it derive from a sequence of a nasal and an obstruent?

Yes, at some point
But no, this was not a sequence of a nasal and an obstruent in PG

Creyeditor wrote: ↑12 Jul 2018 00:24

shimobaatar wrote: ↑12 Jul 2018 00:23

Creyeditor wrote: ↑12 Jul 2018 00:19

shimobaatar wrote: ↑12 Jul 2018 00:17 Does /ᵐb/ derive from *mb?

Ultimately not, no

Does it derive from a sequence of a nasal and an obstruent?

Yes, at some point
But no, this was not a sequence of a nasal and an obstruent in PG

A nasal and a sonorant?

Was the word in PG prefixes? Was that prefix *ana-?

shimobaatar wrote: ↑12 Jul 2018 00:28

Creyeditor wrote: ↑12 Jul 2018 00:24

shimobaatar wrote: ↑12 Jul 2018 00:23

Creyeditor wrote: ↑12 Jul 2018 00:19

shimobaatar wrote: ↑12 Jul 2018 00:17 Does /ᵐb/ derive from *mb?

Ultimately not, no

Does it derive from a sequence of a nasal and an obstruent?

Yes, at some point
But no, this was not a sequence of a nasal and an obstruent in PG

A nasal and a sonorant?

No

spanick wrote: ↑12 Jul 2018 00:47 Was the word in PG prefixed? Was that prefix *ana-?

Double yes

Creyeditor wrote: ↑12 Jul 2018 09:34 Double yes

Is it from *anabeudaną "to command, instruct"?

spanick wrote: ↑12 Jul 2018 14:43

Creyeditor wrote: ↑12 Jul 2018 09:34 Double yes

Is it from *anabeudaną "to command, instruct"?

Yes
I hereby declare you winner. Btw, I was thinking that this word is ambigue in Mannika, because it retains the original meaning 'to command' but also aN- was reinterpreted as a recepient/goal applicative and the verb can therefore mean to offer (s.th) to s.o. (with an obligatory accusative case recipient argument) derived from /ɓə̀dán/ to offer s.th. (to s.o.) with an obligatory accusaive case theme argument.

Right on

Sortsbergish

dodžads
/dod͡ʒads/

Is this a simple word?

Creyeditor wrote: ↑12 Jul 2018 17:30 Is this a simple word?

It is not a compound word, if that is your meaning.

To rephrase the question: Is the word morphologically complex? Does it include more than one morpheme (affix/root)?

Creyeditor wrote: ↑12 Jul 2018 20:34 To rephrase the question: Is the word morphologically complex? Does it include more than one morpheme (affix/root)?

Yes, it contains more than one morpheme.

Does it contain a prefix?

Creyeditor wrote: ↑12 Jul 2018 20:46 Does it contain a prefix?

No

Is the -s a masculine nominative singular ending?

shimobaatar wrote: ↑12 Jul 2018 20:52 Is the -s a masculine nominative singular ending?

Yes

Did the root begin with *d in Proto-Germanic?

Does it include exactly two morphemes?

shimobaatar wrote: ↑12 Jul 2018 21:13 Did the root begin with *d in Proto-Germanic?

Yes

Creyeditor wrote: ↑12 Jul 2018 21:23 Does it include exactly two morphemes?

No

Does it include three or more morphemes?