GRAPH-WIDE SEARCH
MEASURE THE GRAPH ↗NOT JUST A DICTIONARY LOOKUP
6 EVIDENCE COLLECTIONSSEARCH
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
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 LOCALNo exact match for “Infinitive” in this partial English subset. That does not mean the full research corpus—or linguistic scholarship—has no record. Check the original dictionary entry ↗
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 →Infinitive
No extractable etymology was found for this exact spelling. Open the original dictionary entry ↗
Read the complete entry and references ↗ · Contribute a cited dossier
016
MODERN ENTRY POINTS
WORD DOSSIERS
Gothic class-III weak-verb lemmadossier summary
fijan
A Gothic class-III weak verb conventionally glossed hate or detest. Project Wulfila currently exposes 42 candidate tokens under fijan: 13 verified, eight further lexically unambiguous, and 21 explicitly ambiguous with the masculine nd-stem noun fijands, enemy. The surface inventory contains fifteen written shapes, including one exact infinitive fijan in John 7:7 and four j-less forms. Ayora Estevan shows why the overlap cannot be normalized away: Proto-Germanic had already lexicalized *fi(j)and- as enemy, while Gothic still used the matching present-participial formation for one who hates.
OPEN THE FULL LINEAGE ↗Old High German weak verbdossier summary
fīēn
Old High German fīēn—printed fîên in the Althochdeutsches Wörterbuch—was a weak verb meaning to hate, not love, be hostile to, detest, or reject. The official dictionary says it is attested only in Alemannic manuscripts of the eighth and ninth centuries, then inventories an infinitive fien, present participle fiendi, second-person singular preterite fietos, and accusative plural masculine past participle fieta. Three rule-text records concern hating discipline, one’s own will, or no person; gloss records align the participial forms with Latin exosus or exosos; and an Esther gloss aligns fien with detestari. These are source-reported edition and dictionary records, not directly inspected manuscript objects, and the broad manuscript horizon does not identify one exact first token. A separate twelfth-century article printed fien [sic] with the gloss ubere is explicitly left uninterpreted by the dictionary and is not merged into this hate verb. Beside the verb, Old High German had the already lexicalized enemy noun fīant, whose old participial character could still shine through in fixed phrases. The graph therefore shows a living daughter verb beside a grammatical fossil without pretending that either attested form is the reconstructed Proto-Germanic word itself. No historical sound recording exists and the dossier does not display a fabricated phonetic certainty.
OPEN THE FULL LINEAGE ↗Gothic class-III weak-verb lemmadossier summary
hatan
A Gothic weak verb conventionally glossed hate, represented by exactly two currently reported corpus tokens: hatandane in Luke 1:71 and hatandans in Luke 6:27. Both are present participles; no surviving token writes the normalized infinitive. Their translation behavior defeats a one-word gloss: Luke 1 uses fijandam for enemies and hatandane for those hating, while Luke 6 uses hatandans for enemies and fijandam for those hating. Project Wulfila keeps class-III hatan separate from class-I hatjan, Braune calls the forms conjugational fluctuation, Orel publishes a reconstructed class-III alternation, and Sturtevant argues that the hatan shape may instead be a specifically Gothic secondary formation.
OPEN THE FULL LINEAGE ↗Gothic class-II weak-verb lemmacontrarian claim
hatizōn
A Gothic weak verb meaning be angry with or at someone, represented by exactly one verified corpus token: present active second-person plural hatizoþ in John 7:23. Project Wulfila and Streitberg align the form with Greek χολᾶτε in the question “are you angry at me?” and analyze the verb with a dative object. The University of Texas derivational grammar builds class-II hatizōn on the consonantal stem hatiz- of hatis “hatred” or “wrath”; Wright independently lists it as a class-II weak verb. The macronized infinitive is a scholarly citation form, while the manuscript writes only the inflected token without a vowel-length mark. The route continues through the reviewed Germanic noun family and a qualified Indo-European comparison, then stops. One corpus token cannot establish spoken rarity, first use, a complete semantic range, exact pronunciation, or one prehistoric essence.
OPEN THE FULL LINEAGE ↗Gothic class-I weak-verb lemmadossier summary
hatjan
A Gothic weak verb meaning hate, represented by exactly one verified corpus token: the present participle hatjandam in Matthew 5:44. Project Wulfila lemmatizes that token as class-I hatjan, while the parallel Luke 6:27 command uses class-III hatandans from hatan. Braune treats the two shapes as conjugational fluctuation; Orel and the current corpus keep distinct formations visible. The normalized infinitive, the written participle, and the reconstructed parent are therefore never collapsed.
OPEN THE FULL LINEAGE ↗Old Saxon class-II weak verbdossier summary
hatōn
The normalized Old Saxon weak-verb lemma hatōn is supported by a four-locus dictionary inventory: Heliand 1451 writes infinitive hatan in manuscript M and haton in manuscript C; Heliand 4915 writes genitive-plural present-participial hatandiero in M and hettendero in C; manuscript C supplies preterite hatoda at Heliand 5423; and GlG supplies infinitive haton aligned with Latin odisse. Those are six witness readings at four cited loci, not six independent lexemes or four manuscripts. The first Munich infinitive and the Munich hatandiero locus were directly inspected. The category problem is deeper than spelling: Köbler also indexes the Heliand 4915 forms under the separate agent noun hėttiand, enemy. The record therefore exposes the exact point where a live participial form and a lexicalized enemy noun overlap. It does not prove that pursue was the root meaning, that every enemy hates, or that every indexed form belongs unambiguously to one synchronic category.
OPEN THE FULL LINEAGE ↗020
ATTESTED / RECONSTRUCTED / BOUNDARY
HISTORICAL FORMS
No reviewed record in this collection contains “infinitive.” Absence describes this graph, not all of linguistic scholarship.
0311
WHERE INTERPRETATION IS TESTED
CLAIMS & DISPUTES
SCHOLARLY DISPUTES / 9
resolvedestablishedposition text
Is the infinitive fijan itself written?
Yes, once in the current inventory: John 7:7 writes fijan. The other 41 candidates are inflected forms, and fian is a normalized variant redirect rather than a separately inventoried exact infinitive token.
resolvedestablishedposition text
Was Old High German fīēn a verb?
Yes. AWB classifies fîên as a weak verb and supplies infinitive, present-participle, preterite, and past-participle forms.
resolvedestablishedposition text
Do fien, fiendi, fietos, and fieta represent four unrelated words?
No. AWB inventories them inside one weak-verb paradigm as infinitive, present participle, second-person singular preterite, and past participle.
resolvedestablishedposition text
Is the infinitive hatan written in the surviving corpus?
No. The two surviving forms are hatandane and hatandans, both present participles. Hatan is the normalized dictionary citation form assigned by Project Wulfila and the historical grammars.
resolvedestablishedposition text
Is the normalized infinitive hatizōn written in the surviving manuscript?
No. The manuscript token is hatizoþ. Hatizōn is the lexicographic citation form reconstructed from the inflectional paradigm and printed by the historical grammars.
resolvedestablishedposition text
Is the infinitive hatjan itself written in the surviving manuscript?
No. The directly inspected form is hatjandam, a weak masculine dative-plural present participle. Hatjan is the normalized lexical citation form assigned by Project Wulfila and the historical grammars.
resolvedestablishedposition text
Is hatan the normalized Old Saxon headword?
No. It is the exact manuscript-M infinitive at Heliand 1451. Köbler normalizes the lexeme as hatōn and reports manuscript C haton at the same locus.
resolvedestablishedposition text
Is hazzōn itself a directly inspected manuscript token?
No. The current dossier verifies dictionary and research-database records plus three source-reported lexical alignments; it does not claim a manuscript object for the normalized infinitive.
resolvedestablishedposition text
Is the infinitive hettan directly attested in the located corpus inventory?
No. Tío Sáenz’s full-corpus weak-verb inventory lists the lemma as hettan but gives only hettende beneath it. The dossier therefore labels hettan a normalized lexicographic lemma rather than quoting an unattested infinitive token.
CONTRARIAN TRUTHS / 2
RANK 41GRADE Aranked reveal
The enemy fossil and the living hate verb coexisted in Old High German.
AWB records fîên as a weak verb only in eighth- and ninth-century Alemannic manuscripts, but the pocket preserves an infinitive, present participle, preterite, and past participle across hate, hostility, detestation, and rejection. Beside it, fîant was already a strong masculine enemy noun whose old participial character could still shine through in fixed phrases. Old High German therefore preserves both sides of the history at once: the live verbal family and the noun already lexicalized from it. The evidence reveals a grammatical relationship, not the psychology of every enemy and not a securely recovered Proto-Indo-European essence.
RANK 45GRADE Aranked reveal
One Gothic anger verb survives in one question—and not in its dictionary form.
Project Wulfila’s complete current inventory contains one hatizōn token: hatizoþ in John 7:23, “are you angry at me?” Codex Argenteus folio 94v directly preserves the inflection. The manuscript never writes the normalized infinitive or its editorial macron. Grammar then reveals another layer: hatizōn is a class-II verb built from the consonantal stem hatiz- of hatis “hatred” or “wrath.” One English gloss therefore hides a noun-to-verb formation, one surviving grammatical person, and a sharp boundary between pixels and reconstruction.
040
BOOKS / DICTIONARIES / ARTICLES / DATABASES
SOURCES
No reviewed record in this collection contains “infinitive.” Absence describes this graph, not all of linguistic scholarship.
053
FIRST USES & HISTORICAL OBJECTS
ATTESTATION WITNESSES
SOURCE REPORTEDlexical corpus record
Rule text, infinitive with one’s own will
fīēn / fīēn / eighth- or ninth-century Alemannic manuscript; source-reported
Althochdeutsches Wörterbuch — fîênreporting source / OPEN RECORD ↗SOURCE REPORTEDlexical corpus record
Rule text, infinitive with no person
fīēn / fīēn / eighth- or ninth-century Alemannic manuscript; source-reported
Althochdeutsches Wörterbuch — fîênreporting source / OPEN RECORD ↗SOURCE REPORTEDlexical corpus record
Esther 14:15 gloss, infinitive
fīēn / fīēn / eighth- or ninth-century Alemannic gloss; source-reported
Althochdeutsches Wörterbuch — fîênreporting source / OPEN RECORD ↗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.