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 LOCAL2 source sections across 2 headwords matching “Many”. These are separate from the reviewed results below.
ManyEnglish (en) · Unnumbered etymologySource text
Borrowed from French Many or a variant of Maney. The town in Louisiana is named after a Colonel Many.
Original Wiktionary entry and references ↗manyEnglish (en) · Unnumbered etymologySource text
From Middle English many, mani, moni, from Old English maniġ, moniġ, maneġ (“many”), from Proto-West Germanic *manag, from Proto-Germanic *managaz (“many; much”), from Proto-Indo-European *menegʰ-, *mengʰ- (“many, sufficient”) or Proto-Indo-European *méǵh₂- (“big, great”). Cognates Cognate with Scots mony (“many”), Yola many (“many”), North Frisian manag, manig, mäning (“many”), Alemannic German meng (“many”), Central Franconian mannich, männich (“many”), Dutch menig (“many”), German manch (“many, some”), Low German männich, männig (“many”), Luxembourgish muench, munch, munnech (“many”), Danish mangen (“many”), Faroese mangur (“many”), Icelandic margur (“many”), Norwegian Bokmål and Norwegian Nynorsk mang, mange (“many”), Swedish mången (“many”), Gothic 𐌼𐌰𐌽𐌰𐌲𐍃 (manags, “many; much”), French maint (“many”); also Cornish menowgh (“frequent, often”), Irish minic (“frequently, often”), Manx mennick (“frequent, often”), Scottish Gaelic minig (“frequent”), Welsh mynych (“frequent, often”), Belarusian мно́га (mnóha, “many; much”), Bulgarian and Russian мно́го (mnógo, “many; much”), Czech mnohý (“many, numerous”), Macedonian мно́гу (mnógu, “very; many; much”), Polish mnogi (“numerous; plural”), Serbo-Croatian мно̏гӣ, mnȍgī (“many; much, long; large, numerous”), Ukrainian мно́гий (mnóhyj, “many, multiple”). The noun is from Middle English manye, *menye, from Old English manigeo, menigu (“company, multitude, host”), from Proto-West Germanic *managu, *managī, from Proto-Germanic *managō, *managį̄ (“multitude”), from the same root as the determiner. Cognate with Middle Low German menige, menie, menje (“multitude”), Russian много (mnogo), Serbo-Croatian mnogo.
Original Wiktionary entry and references ↗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 →MODERN ENTRY POINTS
WORD DOSSIERS
boomerang
An Aboriginal Australian borrowing recorded in English by 1824. Dharug and Dharawal forms have been proposed, but the Australian National Dictionary Centre says the exact source language remains uncertain.
OPEN THE FULL LINEAGE ↗host
A person who receives guests, borrowed through Anglo-French from Latin hospes, a word that could name either side of a reciprocal hospitality relationship.
OPEN THE FULL LINEAGE ↗mouse
The inherited English name of the small rodent, continued from Old English mūs and the reconstructed Indo-European *mūs- family.
OPEN THE FULL LINEAGE ↗shaman
English shaman, recorded by 1698, is ultimately from Evenki šamān. European scholarship later generalized one Siberian term across many unrelated spiritual traditions.
OPEN THE FULL LINEAGE ↗ATTESTED / RECONSTRUCTED / BOUNDARY
HISTORICAL FORMS
WHERE INTERPRETATION IS TESTED
CLAIMS & DISPUTES
SCHOLARLY DISPUTES / 8
Is fijands an ordinary participle or a lexical noun meaning enemy?
Both categories exist historically and synchronically. Ayora Estevan derives the noun from a Proto-Germanic lexicalized present participle, then shows Gothic still using fi(j)ands as the productive participle one who hates. Token-level syntax and inflection sometimes distinguish them; many surface forms do not.
Does -logy simply mean “the study of”?
No. Merriam-Webster gives oral or written expression as one sense and doctrine, theory, or science as another; American Heritage separately gives discourse or expression and science, theory, or study. “Study of” is a useful reading in many formations, not a universal historical definition.
Can context assign a reading in every cited passage?
Context can support many readings, as eDIL's translations show, but the entry expressly says texts may be capable of either meaning according to context and some records remain un-translated or tentative.
How many meanings does the ONP entry distinguish?
Six numbered zones, with additional formulas: enemy or opponent; devil, monster, or demon; evil spirit; pagan god; the Devil or Satan; and a derogatory hated or bewitched being or thing.
Was friend always spelled friend?
No. OED and MED inventory friand, freond, frend, frind, vrend, freynd, frynd, and many further forms.
Could hata mean mock or humiliate?
Yes. ONP's third sense is mock or humiliate and locates a 1479 confession in which the speaker hatadi God's poor with many insults.
Does the John 7:7 record establish the first use of hatian?
No. It is one edited occurrence among many textual traditions. Without a complete witness comparison and direct manuscript inspection, it cannot be promoted as the earliest surviving token.
Does the Beowulf quotation establish the first use of hete?
No. It is one located edited occurrence among many textual traditions listed by the dictionaries. Without a complete witness comparison and direct manuscript inspection, it cannot be promoted as the first surviving token.
CONTRARIAN TRUTHS / 4
It was never humanity’s universal ancient name for spiritual practitioners.
English globalized a specific Evenki term through European scholarship and applied it to many unrelated traditions.
Care, grief, funerals, and in-laws occupy one Greek noun—but hate does not secretly mean care.
LSJ's κῆδος entry moves through care and concern, anxiety and grief, troubles, mourning and funeral rites, an object of care, and connection by marriage. Homeric κήδεʼ can be many-troubled woes; Aeschylus can make Helen an object of care while playing on marriage affinity. Comparative sources then place the noun beside Celtic and Germanic hatred words under *ḱh₂d-es- and *ḱeh₂d-. The reveal is not a mystical reversal in which hate “really” means care. Merriam-Webster calls the semantic relations far from transparent, Liberman challenges the wider family's unity, and the Greek evidence itself resists a single linear story.
Its most famous behavior is not universal—and even its exact donor language is unsettled.
Many hunting and fighting boomerangs do not return. Dharug and Dharawal sources have been proposed, while ANU keeps the exact language unresolved.
Collect almost says its Latin construction aloud.
Latin colligere joins com- with legere: gathering together. Unlike many dramatic semantic reversals, the modern English core remains strikingly close to the historical construction.
BOOKS / DICTIONARIES / ARTICLES / DATABASES
SOURCES
No reviewed record in this collection contains “many.” Absence describes this graph, not all of linguistic scholarship.
FIRST USES & HISTORICAL OBJECTS
ATTESTATION WITNESSES
The PAPER-OFFICE entry in John Harris’s Lexicon technicum includes Letters of Intelligence among official papers communicated to the King’s Council.
intelligence / intelligence / 1704
Lexicon technicum: or, an universal English dictionary of arts and scienceswitness excerpt / OPEN RECORD ↗Iliad, many-troubled woes for the Argives
κῆδος / κῆδος / Homeric epic textual layer; digital critical-edition line inspected
Homer, Iliad 1.445 — πολύστονα κήδεʼreporting source / OPEN RECORD ↗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.