*SET-U

GRAPH-WIDE SEARCH

MEASURE THE GRAPH ↗

NOT JUST A DICTIONARY LOOKUP

6 EVIDENCE COLLECTIONS

SEARCH
THE GRAPH.

Find a modern word—or search sideways through reconstructed roots, historical forms, meanings, languages, scholars, sources, claims, disputes, and witnesses.

WIKTIONARY VIA KAIKKI / WIKTEXTRACT

Imported dictionary evidence

SOURCE-IMPORTED · UNREVIEWED

These are source reports, not reviewed *SET-U ancestry. A list of templates or numbered etymologies is not an ancestor chain. Scholarly disagreements remain in the original source text.

35,981 English word records · 45,491 etymology sections in this online subset

PARTIAL ENGLISH COVERAGE · FULL CORPUS REMAINS LOCAL

2 source sections across 1 headword matching “Access”. These are separate from the reviewed results below.

Open the permanent entry for access →
accessEnglish (en) · Etymology 1Source text

From Middle English accesse, acces, borrowed from Middle French acces (“attack, onslaught”) or from its source Latin accessus, perfect passive participle of accēdō (“approach; accede”), from ad (“to, toward, at”) + cēdō (“move, yield”). Doublet of accessus. First attested in the early 14th century. The sense "entrance" was first attested about 1380.

Original Wiktionary entry and references ↗
accessEnglish (en) · Etymology 2Source text

From Wiktionary contributors; extracted by Tatu Ylonen / Wiktextract / Kaikki.org. Extraction source · CC-BY-SA-4.0. Selected source text is reformatted for display; language and section identity are retained.

Source dump: 2026-10-01 · Extraction: 2026-10-30. These dates identify a dump snapshot, not an individual page revision.

Snapshot checksums and coverage
SOURCE SHA-256
5ff2c072f8099f2d2ce484bd6957bf179f046d2ad37bc36555edf8bb84cb5291
CORPUS SHA-256
c4c2a77325141846709230e11c2959332acd630d53e52905b72d36211251b081
IMPORT RUN
73216b9a9b78ed3830994bf853103716f5a4dc57099e371e9f8fdc468facca26
SUBSET SELECTION
English-only: shortest normalized query first, then binary lexical order; complete word-language and case-variant groups only. This is a bounded online subset, not the full acquired corpus.

INDEPENDENT SOURCE LIBRARY

More sources for this spelling

These are spelling matches, not a claim of identical senses or agreement. Historical accounts retain their own editions and limits; none is automatically promoted into reviewed ancestry.

Browse the independently attributed sources →
4REVIEWED RESULTS
1WORD DOSSIERS
0HISTORICAL NODES
0SOURCES
3CLAIMS
0WITNESSES
01

MODERN ENTRY POINTS

WORD DOSSIERS

1
02

ATTESTED / RECONSTRUCTED / BOUNDARY

HISTORICAL FORMS

0

No reviewed record in this collection contains “access.” Absence describes this graph, not all of linguistic scholarship.

03

WHERE INTERPRETATION IS TESTED

CLAIMS & DISPUTES

3

SCHOLARLY DISPUTES / 3

openspeculativeposition text

Did ritual blood relationship create the kin sense?

De Vries proposes a ritual social explanation, but the accessible evidence does not establish it as the unique historical path.

resolvedestablishedposition text

Were the Cotton haton, hettendero, and hatoda readings directly inspected?

No. Köbler reports the C readings and Biblissima supplies manuscript identity and dating, but their exact folio pixels were not located and inspected in this review.

resolvedestablishedposition text

Can the hazzōn record be pinned to one exact place?

No. The sources identify Old High German forms and a corpus-wide Franconian transition-zone finding, but the accessible evidence does not locate this headword’s reviewed records to a single manuscript place.

CONTRARIAN TRUTHS / 0

04

BOOKS / DICTIONARIES / ARTICLES / DATABASES

SOURCES

0

No reviewed record in this collection contains “access.” Absence describes this graph, not all of linguistic scholarship.

05

FIRST USES & HISTORICAL OBJECTS

ATTESTATION WITNESSES

0

No reviewed record in this collection contains “access.” Absence describes this graph, not all of linguistic scholarship.

06

SEARCH IS DISCOVERY, NOT PROOF

EVERY RESULT OPENS A PERMANENT EVIDENCE RECORD.

Matching text only locates a record. It does not raise confidence, settle a dispute, establish cognacy, or turn a source report into direct inspection. Follow the result into its citations and editorial limits.