*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.

36RESULTS RETURNED
3WORD DOSSIERS
1HISTORICAL NODES
6SOURCES
14CLAIMS
12WITNESSES
01

MODERN ENTRY POINTS

WORD DOSSIERS

3
Gothic masculine nd-stem common nounexact headword

fijands

A Gothic masculine nd-stem noun conventionally glossed enemy. Project Wulfila currently exposes 26 candidates: three verified noun assignments, two further noun-only assignments, and 21 surface forms also listed under the living verb fijan. Ayora Estevan explains the collision diachronically: Proto-Germanic had already lexicalized the present-participial *fi(j)and- as enemy, while Gothic retained productive one-who-hates participles beside the noun. The five noun-only candidates use fiand, fijands, fijande, and fijandis; all five were inspected in Codex Argenteus facsimiles.

OPEN THE FULL LINEAGE ↗
German masculine noundossier summary

Feind

The modern German noun for a personal, political, military, or ideological enemy or opponent. Duden derives it through Middle High German vīnt or vīant and Old High German fīand, literally the hating one; DWDS dates Old High German fīant and fījant to the eighth century and identifies the Germanic ancestor as a petrified substantivized present participle. Grimm’s dictionary independently compares Gothic fijands, Old English fēond, English fiend, Dutch vijand, and Nordic forms, while warning that its own still-deeper foam hypothesis required confirmation. The reviewed route therefore follows the inherited enemy noun to reconstructed *fi(j)and- and *fi(j)ēn-, then treats *peh₁- as proposed and stops.

OPEN THE FULL LINEAGE ↗
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 ↗
02

ATTESTED / RECONSTRUCTED / BOUNDARY

HISTORICAL FORMS

1
03

WHERE INTERPRETATION IS TESTED

CLAIMS & DISPUTES

14

SCHOLARLY DISPUTES / 12

openprobableexact word

Is fijands just an ordinary Gothic present participle?

No single category covers the evidence. Ayora Estevan derives the enemy noun from a Proto-Germanic lexicalized participle while also showing that Gothic retained productive present-participial uses of the same formation.

openprobableexact word

Can the nd-ending alone distinguish enemy from one who hates?

No. The noun and productive participle share surface inflection. Case, complementation, agreement, and context resolve some passages, but Project Wulfila leaves 21 candidates lexically and morphosyntactically ambiguous.

openproposedexact word

Was fijands still transparently one who hates to Gothic speakers?

The formal relationship was available because the verb and productive participle survived, but inherited lexicalization means ordinary noun use need not have been compositionally reanalyzed on every occasion.

openproposedexact word

Does *fi(j)and- securely descend from *peh₁-?

Only through the proposed deeper analysis of its Germanic verb base. The lexicalized participle-to-verb relation is stronger than the Indo-European route, whose intermediate morphology and semantic unity remain reconstructive.

openprobableexact word

Does the Luke lexical swap resolve the remaining 21 noun-participle candidates?

No. Luke 1:71 and 6:27 show that fijan and hatan can exchange the work of enemies and those hating, but those two contextual alignments do not determine every other fijand- token.

resolvedestablishedexact word

Does the surviving corpus contain 26 secure noun tokens?

No. Project Wulfila exposes 26 candidates under fijands: three verified, two further noun-only but unverified, and 21 explicitly shared with the fijan verb inventory.

resolvedprobableexact word

Did one who hates lexicalize as enemy only inside Gothic?

No. Old Norse, Faroese, Old English, Old Frisian, Old Dutch, and Old High German enemy nouns require a pre-Gothic Germanic formation.

resolvedestablishedexact word

Did Gothic fijands mean devil or evil spirit?

The reviewed Gothic noun inventory centers on enemy and regularly translates Greek echthros. Old English feónd developed or preserved devil senses, but that collateral history cannot be projected backward onto every Gothic occurrence.

resolvedestablishedexact word

Is English fiend descended from Gothic fijands?

No. English fiend continues Old English feónd; Gothic fijands is a collateral Germanic cousin from the same reconstructed formation, not the donor of the English word.

resolvedestablishedexact word

Do 26 candidates measure spoken Gothic frequency?

No. They measure a bounded fragmentary textual corpus with biblical translation effects, ambiguous lemma assignments, and duplicate manuscript witnesses.

resolvedestablishedexact word

Does the Codex Argenteus route map the geographic spread of fijands?

No. Werden, Prague, Stockholm, Holland, and Uppsala trace custody of evidence objects long after Gothic ceased to be a living vernacular in those places.

resolvedestablishedexact word

Are A, B, and Carolinus witnesses separate lexical usage events?

They are separate surviving manuscript tokens, but duplicate witnesses of one passage cannot be counted as independent acts of historical usage.

CONTRARIAN TRUTHS / 2

RANK 33GRADE Aexact ranked word

Enemy is a fossilized hater—but lexicalization does not make every token transparent.

Project Wulfila lists 26 candidates under the Gothic enemy noun and 42 under the verb fijan; exactly 21 surface tokens belong to both inventories. Ayora Estevan explains why: Proto-Germanic had already lexicalized one who hates as enemy, while Gothic retained the productive participle. The five noun-only tokens are directly inspected; the 21-token overlap remains public instead of being counted twice as certainty.

RANK 32GRADE Aranked reveal

Enemy is a fossilized hater—but 21 Gothic tokens still refuse to choose.

Project Wulfila lists 42 candidates under fijan and 26 under the enemy noun fijands. Their intersection is exactly 21 surface tokens. Ayora Estevan explains the collision: *fi(j)and- had lexicalized as enemy before Gothic, while Gothic still possessed the productive present participle one who hates. Case and syntax resolve some passages; the remaining 21 stay public as noun-versus-participle ambiguity.

04

BOOKS / DICTIONARIES / ARTICLES / DATABASES

SOURCES

6
05

FIRST USES & HISTORICAL OBJECTS

ATTESTATION WITNESSES

12
DIRECTLY INSPECTEDmanuscript

Codex Argenteus, Matthew 5:43

fijands / fijands / early 6th century

Codex Argenteus facsimile 6 — folio 3v, Matthew 5:42–47exact attested form / OPEN RECORD ↗
DIRECTLY INSPECTEDmanuscript

Codex Argenteus, Matthew 5:44

fijands / fijands / early 6th century

Codex Argenteus facsimile 6 — folio 3v, Matthew 5:42–47exact attested form / OPEN RECORD ↗
DIRECTLY INSPECTEDmanuscript

Codex Argenteus, Matthew 10:36

fijands / fijands / early 6th century

Codex Argenteus facsimile 31 — folio 27r, Matthew 10:34–40exact attested form / OPEN RECORD ↗
DIRECTLY INSPECTEDmanuscript

Codex Argenteus, Luke 1:74

fijands / fijands / early 6th century

Codex Argenteus facsimile 145 — folio 123r, Luke 1:69–77exact attested form / OPEN RECORD ↗
DIRECTLY INSPECTEDmanuscript

Codex Argenteus, Luke 10:19

fijands / fijands / early 6th century

Codex Argenteus facsimile 228 — folio 164v, Luke 10:17–21exact attested form / OPEN RECORD ↗
SOURCE REPORTEDlexical corpus record

Codex Argenteus, Luke 1:71

fijands / fijands / early 6th-century candidate, source-reported

Lemma fijands — Gothic enemy noun and 26-token candidate inventoryexact attested form / OPEN RECORD ↗
SOURCE REPORTEDlexical corpus record

Codex Argenteus, Luke 6:22

fijands / fijands / early 6th-century candidate, source-reported

Gothic Bible word analysis — Luke 6:22, fijandexact attested form / OPEN RECORD ↗
SOURCE REPORTEDlexical corpus record

Codex Argenteus, Luke 6:27

fijands / fijands / early 6th-century candidate, source-reported

Lemma fijands — Gothic enemy noun and 26-token candidate inventoryexact attested form / OPEN RECORD ↗
SOURCE REPORTEDlexical corpus record

Codex Argenteus, Luke 6:35

fijands / fijands / early 6th-century candidate, source-reported

Lemma fijands — Gothic enemy noun and 26-token candidate inventoryexact attested form / OPEN RECORD ↗
SOURCE REPORTEDlexical corpus record

Codex Argenteus, Luke 19:27

fijands / fijands / early 6th-century candidate, source-reported

Lemma fijands — Gothic enemy noun and 26-token candidate inventoryexact attested form / OPEN RECORD ↗
SOURCE REPORTEDlexical corpus record

Codex Argenteus, Luke 19:43

fijands / fijands / early 6th-century candidate, source-reported

Lemma fijands — Gothic enemy noun and 26-token candidate inventoryexact attested form / OPEN RECORD ↗
SOURCE REPORTEDlexical corpus record

Codex Argenteus, Luke 20:43

fijands / fijands / early 6th-century candidate, source-reported

Lemma fijands — Gothic enemy noun and 26-token candidate inventoryexact attested form / 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.