Canonical edges, each carrying form and meaning history.
THE CHANGE ATLAS
WORD FAMILIES ↗EVERY REVIEWED EDGE / TWO HISTORIES EACH
FORM → MEANING → EVIDENCEHOW WORDS MOVE.
HOW MEANINGS MUTATE.
A global atlas of every reviewed transformation in the graph—from lost vowels and borrowed spellings to meanings narrowed, inverted, elevated, and remade.
EVERY TRANSFORMATION
IS A CLAIM.
Every edge names the linked forms, relationship, sound history, semantic history, scholar, confidence, chronology when known, and the sources that warrant it. Search the language of change without flattening it.
No reviewed edge is allowed to omit what changed in form.
No reviewed edge is allowed to omit what changed in meaning.
515 distinct sources support the edge ledger.
Named analyses remain attached instead of becoming anonymous fact.
Borrowing, inheritance, derivation, uncertainty, and more stay distinct.
SEARCH THE TRANSFORMATIONS
FOLLOW CHANGE ITSELF.
The atlas searches the exact reviewed prose and authoritative edge labels. It does not manufacture universal “sound laws” or semantic categories by guessing from descriptions.
SEMANTIC HISTORY
1025 EVIDENCE-BACKED CHANGES
The quantity-normalized citation form hazzōn selects the ōn member of a source set also printed as hazōn and haʒʒōn; hazzēn, hazēn, and haʒʒēn represent the neighboring ēn member. This edge is paradigm navigation, not a claim that one written form changed directly into the combined display.
The variants occupy the same reviewed hate, emulation, following, and hostile-pursuit field. The edge does not assign every gloss to every token or prove that the ēn and ōn records were interchangeable in every dialect.
CHRONOLOGYOld High German citation and source-reporting layers rather than two directly dated adjacent sound changes.
CONFIDENCE NOTEIndependent sources print both vowel-class forms, and corpus-wide research establishes ēn / ōn double forms as an Old High German phenomenon. The accessible article abstract does not verify hazzōn among its twenty repeated examples, and no underlying token was directly inspected.
- supportsDuden — hassen · Herkunft: Old High German haʒʒēn and haʒʒōn↗
- contextDeutsches Wörterbuch von Jacob Grimm und Wilhelm Grimm — hassen · Opening comparative paragraph: Old High German haʒên and haʒôn↗
- supportsProto-Germanic *xatiz, *xatōn-, -ēn- and *xatjan- · Old High German: hazzēn (8th century) and hazzōn (9th century)↗
Old Saxon heti is directly compared with the reconstructed Germanic noun represented here as *hatiz-. The inherited h-t frame and i-stem comparison are published; no unattested West Germanic intermediate or falsely precise sound-change date is inserted.
The Germanic hate, anger, enmity, and hostility field continues in an Old Saxon noun whose located contexts include endured persecution or hostile speech and confessed hostility. No one daughter context is promoted as the original meaning.
CHRONOLOGYProto-Germanic reconstruction into ninth- and tenth-century Old Saxon textual and manuscript evidence.
CONFIDENCE NOTEThe inherited family is secure, while Fulk and Köbler use an i-stem analysis and Pfeifer calls the wider noun an old es/os-stem. The exact reconstructed morphology is therefore not singular.
- supportsA Comparative Grammar of the Early Germanic Languages — Gothic hatis · p. 80, §5.2: Gothic hatis transferred to the a-stems; compare i-stem Old English hete and Old Saxon heti↗
- challengesDWDS — Hass, etymology after Wolfgang Pfeifer · Pfeifer etymology: Old Saxon heti and the wider noun as an old es/os-stem↗
- supportsAltsächsisches Wörterbuch — hatōn and hėttiand · hėti* entry: st. M. (i); Germanic *hati-, *hatiz; complete B field↗
OED derives the West Germanic stem vowel from *iu, produced by contraction of the base vowel *ī, earlier *ij, with the participial suffix vowel; Old English ēo and īo reflect branch and dialect development.
An inherited present-participial agent formation functions as the ordinary noun friend, relation, or favored person in Old English.
CHRONOLOGYProto-Germanic reconstruction into Old English textual evidence.
CONFIDENCE NOTEThe cross-Germanic set and participial morphology are published, but *frijōnd- is reconstructed and the exact prehistoric phonetic sequence was never written down.
The agent noun is built with Germanic present-participial nd-morphology on the *frī- or earlier *frij- base. OED traces the later *iu diphthong to contraction with the suffixal vowel.
A productive loving or favorably disposed participant becomes a lexical noun for friend or relation. The derivation does not make every later friend literally a person performing a continuous act of loving.
CHRONOLOGYGermanic derivation before the daughter-language records.
CONFIDENCE NOTEThree independent dictionary treatments identify the participial relation. The exact lexicalization date and every prehistoric inflection remain unrecoverable.
- supportsOxford English Dictionary — friend, n. & adj. · Etymology Summary; similar formation of fiend; Form history↗
- supportsAn Anglo-Saxon Dictionary Online — freónd · Grammar: freónd, freónde loving, participle of freón↗
- supportsAn Anglo-Saxon Dictionary Online — freón · Headword freón: to free, love↗
Old High German friunt reflects the inherited Germanic participial stem represented as *frijōnd-. The exact pre-High-German vowel sequence and full paradigm are reconstructed from the cognate set.
An inherited loving or favorably disposed participant is already lexicalized as an ordinary friend or relation noun in the recorded High German branch.
CHRONOLOGYProto-Germanic reconstruction into the eighth-century Old High German record.
CONFIDENCE NOTEThe daughter-language forms and participial analysis are explicit, but the parent form was not written and no exact lexicalization event survives.
Old Dutch friunt reflects reconstructed *frijōnd-, with daughter-language vowel and participial-stem evidence supporting the comparison rather than one preserved proto-spelling.
An inherited loving or favorably disposed participant is lexicalized as the noun friend before the surviving Old Dutch record.
CHRONOLOGYProto-Germanic reconstruction into the Old Dutch record around 1100.
CONFIDENCE NOTEEWN explicitly prints the reconstruction and all three dictionaries identify the participial origin; the parent form itself is unattested.
- supportsEtymologisch Woordenboek van het Nederlands — vriend · EWN etymology: < Proto-Germanic *frijōnd-↗
- supportsWoordenboek der Nederlandsche Taal — VRIEND I · Opening etymology and Germanic cognate set↗
- supportsMiddelnederlandsch Woordenboek — VRIENT I · Opening etymology: participle of Germanic vriën↗
Old Norse frændi reflects the inherited Germanic nd-participial stem represented as *frijōnd-. North Germanic vowel development and contraction produce the normalized long front vowel represented by fræ- or editorial frǽ-, while the exact prehistoric sequence remains reconstructed.
The inherited loving or favorably disposed participant lexicalizes in the Scandinavian branch with kinship as its recorded center, while friend and companion uses remain visible. Cognacy therefore survives alongside semantic divergence.
CHRONOLOGYProto-Germanic reconstruction into the Old Norse poetic and prose record.
CONFIDENCE NOTEThe cognate set, participial analysis, attested lemma, and semantic distribution are published. The parent form, exact contraction sequence, and moment when kinship became central were not directly recorded.
- contextOxford English Dictionary — friend, n. & adj. · Etymology Summary; notes on meanings in other Germanic languages↗
- supportsDictionary of Old Norse Prose — frǽndi, masculine noun · Headword frǽndi sb. m.; 225 citations; senses 1–5↗
- supportsAn Icelandic-English Dictionary — FRÆNDI · FRÆNDI header and main definition↗
The attested Greek adjective is analyzed through an earlier *setu-mo- formation; initial *s is lost in the proposed path.
Truth, actuality, and proper order form the reconstructed semantic field.
CONFIDENCE NOTEThe exact morphology and wider family have competing analyses.
The Latin shining family has been compared with a reconstructed *kand- root.
Shining and glowing remain the proposed semantic core.
CONFIDENCE NOTEPublished analyses differ on the deeper formation and cognate set.
Greek λέγω is traditionally derived from PIE *leǵ-; some scholarship argues that an initial *s should be reconstructed.
The daughter evidence spans collecting and speaking, but the exact semantic path remains reconstructed.
CONFIDENCE NOTEThe competing *sleǵ- analysis prevents an unqualified grade.
Latin lēx has traditionally been connected with the gather / collect family; published work argues for a root with initial *s.
A collection or selection of rules is a proposed semantic bridge, not an uncontested fact.
CONFIDENCE NOTEBoth the root shape and exact semantic derivation remain disputed.
Calculus has traditionally been treated as an irregular diminutive of calx, but the phonology and meanings are problematic and a shared non-Indo-European source with a Greek stone-word has been proposed.
A small stone or pebble may connect to lime or limestone; the route is unsettled.
CONFIDENCE NOTEThe calculus-to-calx derivation is not secure.
The shape *ghos-ti- has been analyzed as a derivative of hypothetical *ǵhes-; the exact ablaut and suffixal analysis remain proposed.
A take-or-give-in-exchange base could underlie the reciprocal duties attached to the outsider or guest.
CONFIDENCE NOTEMerriam-Webster explicitly calls the deeper base hypothetical; American Heritage and the University of Texas stop at *ghos-ti-.
Latin scīre has been compared with an Indo-European cutting/separating base; the exact formation and even the semantic bridge remain disputed.
A proposed development moves from cutting or separating to distinguishing and then knowing.
CHRONOLOGYThe comparison belongs to prehistory, not a directly attested change.
CONFIDENCE NOTEMerriam-Webster records competing morphological analyses and calls the semantic progression questionable; Ernout and Meillet call the comparison uncertain.
Old Persian xšāyaθiyā is analyzed through xšāy- “rule, have power, possess” and compared with dialectal Indo-European *tkeH-.
Rule or possession supplies the base for a sovereign title.
CHRONOLOGYThe comparison belongs to Indo-European prehistory.
CONFIDENCE NOTEMerriam-Webster also records a materially different Lexikon der indogermanischen Verben analysis from *h₃ekʷ-; neither is promoted as consensus.
Encyclopaedia Iranica groups Old French eschés with descendants of Arabic al-šaṭranj; the exact phonological mediation conflicts with the reviewed šāh account.
The traveling name of the game supplies a competing source for the French game name.
CHRONOLOGYArabic chess vocabulary to medieval French.
CONFIDENCE NOTEThis edge is a published competing route, not a synthesized consensus.
The Old Persian verbal base xšāy- is alternatively derived from reconstructed *h₃ekʷ- rather than *tkeH-.
A proposed “catch sight of, envisage” base develops toward power or rule.
CHRONOLOGYIndo-European prehistory to Old Iranian.
CONFIDENCE NOTEMerriam-Webster says the traditional comparison is problematic and records this materially different analysis.
Kallio compares Proto-Finnic *sakna with Palaeo-Germanic *stagh-ná- as an ancient borrowing adapted to Finnic phonotactics.
A Germanic pile or stack term is proposed to have named a stone-pile stove, then the sauna containing it.
CHRONOLOGYProposed prehistoric borrowing before attested Finnish.
CONFIDENCE NOTEKotus says the Germanic proposal has gained support; Ylikoski also records explicit scholarly skepticism.
The isiXhosa form entered English with its spelling substantially preserved; the exact immediate donor cannot be isolated from the reviewed source.
The humanity and goodness field becomes an English ethical and philosophical term.
CHRONOLOGYEnglish record by 1926.
CONFIDENCE NOTEThe source names both isiXhosa and isiZulu, so this parallel route remains proposed rather than pretending one donor is uniquely established.
English boomerang is compared with Dharug bumarin, with substantial early spelling variation in colonial records.
An Aboriginal Australian name for a missile or club became the international English object name and later a recoil metaphor.
CHRONOLOGYEnglish record by 1824; early colonial borrowing in the Sydney region.
CONFIDENCE NOTEMerriam-Webster assigns Dharug; ANU says the exact Aboriginal source language is still uncertain.
English boomerang is compared with the recorded Turuwal or Dharawal form bou-mar-ang; early colonial spellings vary substantially.
An Aboriginal Australian returning-club name is proposed as the source of the English object word.
CHRONOLOGYEarly colonial borrowing in or south of the Sydney region.
CONFIDENCE NOTEMcCarthy assigns this form to Turuwal or Dharawal, while ANU says the exact source language remains uncertain.
Louisiana French bayouque is compared with reconstructed early Choctaw *bayok.
A local watercourse label is proposed to have entered colonial Louisiana French.
CHRONOLOGYProposed early colonial contact route.
CONFIDENCE NOTEMerriam-Webster calls the Choctaw route possible and explains both the supporting place-name evidence and the absence of secure later bayuk attestations.
One analysis derives American Spanish poncho from Mapuche forms such as pontho / ponchu / pontro; competing scholarship argues that the Indigenous forms may instead reflect Spanish.
A blanket or textile term and the sleeveless garment label are historically associated, but the direction of transfer is unresolved.
CHRONOLOGYSpanish records and Mapuche lexicography overlap too closely for this dossier to declare one direction proven.
CONFIDENCE NOTEMerriam-Webster and Sánchez support a Mapuche route; RAE and Iwasaki support or favor a Spanish-internal route.
The Spanish-internal proposal compares garment poncho with a faded or discolored adjective in the pocho / poncho family; the exact formation and chronology remain debated.
A color or condition adjective is proposed to have become the name of a plain or faded garment.
CHRONOLOGYA 1530 Spanish-language garment record is central to the argument.
CONFIDENCE NOTEThe early Spanish record challenges a one-way Mapuche derivation, but the competing analysis is not treated as closed.
READ THE EDGE, NOT JUST THE WORD
TWO HISTORIES TRAVEL TOGETHER.
Pronunciation, spelling, morphology, loss, insertion, adaptation, and regular historical development.
Narrowing, broadening, metaphor, social reanalysis, technical specialization, and meaning retained.
Attested forms, reconstructed forms marked by *, and explicit knowledge boundaries never share one certainty label.
Scholar, confidence, chronology, source stance, locator, and evidence note remain attached to the atomic edge.