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 “Readi” 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.
Mayhew–Skeat (1888)
1888; pinned HTML transcription updated October 28, 2024Readi
No extractable etymology was found for this exact spelling. Open the original dictionary entry ↗
Read the complete entry and references ↗ · Contribute a cited dossier
0112
MODERN ENTRY POINTS
WORD DOSSIERS
Middle Irish noundossier summary
cais
eDIL separates two Irish headwords written cais. The first, also recorded as caise, is explicitly explained both as love and as hate; its cited passages and glossary equations range from searc and grádh "love" to miscais and mioscais "hatred", with context deciding individual readings. One Éigse line is tentatively translated so that the same visible form occurs on both sides: "my love ... is met by hatred(?)". The question mark matters. The second eDIL headword cais means "eye" and is excluded from this semantic lineage. These records establish a remarkable lexicographic opposition, not one timeless essence, a chronology from love to hate, or proof that every occurrence belongs to one historically indivisible sense. John T. Koch compares the noun with Proto-Celtic *katsi- < *kad-t/si- and a wider *kad- family, but that ancestry and its proposed Germanic comparison remain open. eDIL itself generally supplies etymologies only selectively. No manuscript pixels were directly inspected, no earliest-use or historical-frequency claim is made, and no exact pronunciation is invented.
OPEN THE FULL LINEAGE ↗verb · nouncontrarian claim
checkmate
An inescapable chess defeat and, figuratively, complete thwarting; a compound transmitted through French, Arabic, and Persian chess language.
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 ↗Old Saxon masculine i-stem nouncontrarian claim
heti
Old Saxon heti is an attested noun, not a reconstructed Proto-Germanic form. Köbler prints the normalized citation form hėti* with a trailing asterisk, then gives three cited lexical loci whose inflections produce five witness readings: accusative singular heti at Heliand 1322 in manuscripts M, C, and V; dative singular heti at Genesis 60; and genitive singular hetias in the tenth-century Saxon Confession. No nominative singular appears in that inventory, but the exact surface heti is visibly written in Munich Cgm 25. The directly inspected Heliand line places the noun in the Beatitudes, where righteous people endure rîkioro manno heti endi harmquidi, powerful men's hostility or persecution and hostile speech. The Saxon Confession instead places hetias beside malice, envy, and slander among confessed wrongs. Those contexts establish a range broader than one private feeling without proving that persecution was the prehistoric root meaning. Fulk and Köbler analyze the Old Saxon comparison as an i-stem; Pfeifer describes the wider Germanic noun as an old es/os-stem, so the inherited morphological account remains public rather than falsely harmonized.
OPEN THE FULL LINEAGE ↗Old Saxon adjectivedossier summary
hōti
Old Saxon hōti is a normalized adjective headword supported by three Heliand loci and five reported witness readings: nominative plural hotie in manuscript M and huotia in C at line 5183; accusative singular hotean in M and huotian in C at line 5246; and nominative singular huoti in C at line 5285. The Munich forms hotie and hotean are directly visible in Cgm 25 scans 150 and 152; the three Cotton readings remain source-reported. Köbler nevertheless prints hōti* with a trailing star, so the mark cannot be reduced to “no nominative exists”: the same entry explicitly reports nominative huoti. The deeper genealogy splits. UT groups hōti with the inherited hate family under Pokorny's k̑ād- “hate, displeasure, uneasiness”; Köbler cross-references hatōn as a headword but gives the adjective a distinct etymology through Germanic *hwōtja- beside *hwōtō “threat” and Pokorny's *kʷē̆d- / *kʷō̆d- complex “bore, prick, stab,” whose wider reflexes include whetting and inciting. The graph preserves both lanes. It does not turn hostile intent into a timeless essence, infer exact pronunciation from spelling, or pretend that a dictionary cross-reference settles ancestry.
OPEN THE FULL LINEAGE ↗noun · verbcontrarian claim
lecture
A formal instructional talk, named through a Latin lineage whose central action was reading.
OPEN THE FULL LINEAGE ↗nouncontrarian claim
legend
A traditional story or explanatory inscription, descended from Latin “things to be read.”
OPEN THE FULL LINEAGE ↗adjectivecontrarian claim
legible
Capable of being read or deciphered; from Late Latin legibilis and Latin legere “to read.”
OPEN THE FULL LINEAGE ↗nouncontrarian claim
lesson
A unit of instruction or something learned, descending through a word that first named an act or selection of reading.
OPEN THE FULL LINEAGE ↗verb, adjectivecontrarian claim
select
To choose or mark out from a group, borrowed from Latin selectus and seligere, literally gathering apart.
OPEN THE FULL LINEAGE ↗Dutch masculine noundossier summary
vijand
The ordinary Dutch noun for an enemy or opponent descends through Middle Dutch viant or vient and Old Dutch fīunt or fīant from a Germanic present-participial formation: literally the hating one. ONW counts twenty-six Old Dutch records and says the corresponding hate verb is no longer known in Dutch; VMNW counts 407 thirteenth-century records across enemy, Devil, and monster senses. Several Dutch etymologists propose that the medieval use for the Devil helped preserve the word’s full ending, unlike vriend, but they mark that explanation as possible or probable rather than demonstrated. The earliest Old Dutch Devil reading is itself textually disputed, and the Wachtendonck Psalms witnesses are later copies, not directly inspected tenth-century objects.
OPEN THE FULL LINEAGE ↗Ancient Greek neuter noundossier summary
κῆδος
Ancient Greek κῆδος is an attested neuter noun whose lexical record spans care or concern, anxiety and grief, troubles, mourning and funeral rites, an object of care, and connection by marriage. LSJ documents the Doric variant κᾶδος, Homeric plural forms such as κήδεα or elided κήδεʼ, an Aeschylean play between Helen as an object of care and marriage connection, and a warning that some marriage-based readings of Homeric passages are wrong. Comparative sources place the noun beneath a proposed *ḱh₂d-es- formation and *ḱeh₂d- base alongside Celtic and Germanic material, but the semantic unity of care, grief, battle, hostility, pursuit, and hate remains disputed. The dossier preserves the Greek semantic network, the proposed ancestry, and the explicit boundary as separate claim layers.
OPEN THE FULL LINEAGE ↗028
ATTESTED / RECONSTRUCTED / BOUNDARY
HISTORICAL FORMS
*
Middle Chinese (reconstructed reading) / Sino-Tibetan
*drae
tea; name of a plant
- DATE
- Middle Chinese reconstruction
- MATCH
- language
- DOSSIERS
- 5
Middle Irish / Indo-European
cais
love; hate, with readings dependent on context
- DATE
- Middle Irish and later Irish dictionary citations
- MATCH
- gloss
- DOSSIERS
- 1
Latin / Indo-European
lectiō
a reading; act of reading
- DATE
- Late Latin
- MATCH
- gloss
- DOSSIERS
- 1
Latin / Indo-European
lectūra
a reading; act of reading
- DATE
- Late / Medieval Latin
- MATCH
- gloss
- DOSSIERS
- 1
Middle English / Indo-European
legende
a saint’s life or reading; inscription
- DATE
- Middle English
- MATCH
- gloss
- DOSSIERS
- 1
Anglo-French / Indo-European
legende
reading matter; saint’s life
- DATE
- Anglo-French
- MATCH
- gloss
- DOSSIERS
- 1
Middle English / Indo-European
lesson / lessoun
a reading, assigned text, or unit of instruction
- DATE
- Middle English, 13th–15th centuries
- MATCH
- gloss
- DOSSIERS
- 1
Anglo-French / Indo-European
leçon
a reading or lesson
- DATE
- Anglo-French, c. 1066–1500
- MATCH
- gloss
- DOSSIERS
- 1
0319
WHERE INTERPRETATION IS TESTED
CLAIMS & DISPUTES
SCHOLARLY DISPUTES / 12
openproposedposition text
Does the Éigse line certainly use cais once for love and once for hatred?
Not certainly. eDIL tentatively translates "mo chais is cais 'na agaid" as "my love ... is met by hatred(?)" and prints a question mark on the second reading.
openproposedposition text
Are the opposite readings one polysemous word, merged historical homonyms, or a lexicographic convenience?
eDIL groups them in one headword but does not, by that editorial act alone, settle the full historical relationship among every love and hate occurrence.
openprobableposition text
Did candidates claim moral purity?
The whitened toga is historical and lexical. Reading it as a guaranteed moral-purity claim goes beyond what the word formation alone proves.
openproposedposition text
Was shun the original meaning of hata?
Not established. Cleasby and Vigfússon propose that the poetic dative shun sense was probably original, then immediately say hatta with double t may be the better reading.
openproposedposition text
Does hata gulli simply mean hate gold?
Not securely. Cleasby treats the dative phrase as spend gold, ONP has a separate prose contempt-for-gold record, and the poetic reading itself is questioned.
openprobableposition text
Do the written endings alone settle the participles’ case and gender?
No. Project Wulfila gives masculine or neuter genitive plural for hatandane and masculine nominative or accusative plural for hatandans. The clauses resolve the contextual readings through syntax and Greek alignment, but the surface forms remain formally syncretic.
openprobableposition text
Is Heliand 4915 unambiguously an enemy noun?
No. The separate hėttiand entry establishes the lexicalized noun analysis, while the verb entry retains the same readings as participial evidence. The surviving phrase alone does not erase the overlap.
openprobableposition text
Did Old Saxon hatōn mean pursue as well as hate?
Köbler lexicographically gives both hassen and verfolgen, so the action range belongs in the record. The four-locus inventory does not by itself assign both readings to every token or establish their chronology.
openprobableposition text
Does the trailing star specifically mean that the nominative singular is unattested?
That is a plausible reading because Köbler lists only accusative, dative, and genitive evidence, but no explicit legend defining this exact trailing star was located in the reviewed source.
openprobableposition text
Does the root prove that reading is “gathering letters”?
No. Latin legere covers gathering, selecting, and reading, but the precise semantic steps cannot be recovered from a slogan alone.
openprobableposition text
Why did appointed readings become unverifiable stories?
Association with saints’ lives and inherited narratives supplies the historical environment, but the semantic expansion was gradual rather than one datable pivot.
resolvedestablishedposition text
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.
CONTRARIAN TRUTHS / 7
RANK 49GRADE Aranked reveal
The token is attested even though the dictionary headword wears an asterisk.
Köbler heads the Old Saxon noun hėti* but lists written accusative and dative heti plus genitive hetias beneath it. The exact Munich Heliand token is directly visible in the clause rîkioro manno heti endi harmquidi. The dictionary count three also hides a second distinction: it means three lexical loci, while Heliand 1322 survives with M, C, and V readings, producing five reported witness readings across the dossier. The star therefore belongs to an editorial headword layer; it does not erase the attested surface or turn Old Saxon into Proto-Germanic. The visible Heliand context is endured hostility or persecution, while the Saxon Confession groups hetias with malice, envy, and slander. Even the inherited grammar stays open: Fulk and Köbler use an i-stem analysis, whereas Pfeifer calls the wider noun an old es/os-stem.
RANK 50GRADE Aranked reveal
The hostile adjective may belong to whet and threat, not hate—and its starred lemma still has a nominative.
Köbler's Old Saxon entry reports five written readings at three Heliand loci, including nominative hotie, huotia, and huoti, yet heads the entry hōti*. The asterisk therefore cannot be explained away as “no nominative survives.” More radically, the sources split at the root. UT groups hōti with hatōn and heti under the inherited hate etymon k̑ād-. Köbler's same entry cross-references hatōn but reconstructs a different *hwōtja- adjective beside *hwōtō “threat” and Pokorny's *kʷē̆d- / *kʷō̆d- family of boring, pricking, sharpening, whetting, and inciting. Munich hotie and hotean are directly visible in contexts of hostile minds and hostile intent; Cotton huotia, huotian, and huoti remain source-reported. The unveiling is not “hostility secretly means sharpened hate.” It is that rigorous etymology sometimes reveals two irreconcilable maps where a flat dictionary would print one arrow.
RANK 197GRADE A−contrarian claim
Legible belongs to gathering and reading.
Late Latin legibilis means able to be read and comes from legere, the Latin gather, select, and read family.
RANK 203GRADE Acontrarian claim
A lesson began as a reading.
Anglo-French leçon and Late Latin lectio name reading before the word expands into instruction and something learned from experience.
RANK 206GRADE Aranked reveal
A legend was “something to be read.”
The dubious-story sense came later than the Medieval Latin reading category.
RANK 207GRADE Acontrarian claim
A lecture began as reading, not speaking.
Latin lectūra named an act of reading before English made it a discourse.
RANK 208GRADE A-ranked reveal
To select is to gather apart.
Latin seligere combines se- “apart” with legere “gather, select.” The same gathering verb sits behind lecture, lesson, legend, and collect.
041
BOOKS / DICTIONARIES / ARTICLES / DATABASES
SOURCES
050
FIRST USES & HISTORICAL OBJECTS
ATTESTATION WITNESSES
No reviewed record in this collection contains “readi.” 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.