Edge Rewrite
// request.cf · coarse context

A page that knows where it met you.

Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a2263b5839fe910d

Jump to content

Talk:Fech fech

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 16 years ago by 68.117.193.157 in topic Etymology

Etymology

[edit]

If anybody knows whether the word is indeed of Arabic origin or not, please edit the article accordingly.

It was me who perhaps wrongly assumed this European word to be a direct import from Arabic, Berber or another Semitic language, and then added the "Arabic [script, not necessarily language] needed" tag here. I guess it just looked too “Arabic” to me.

When I had found the spelling ‹fesh fesh› somewhere, I entered “فش” in a search engine, together with Qattara in Arabic script. I don't understand Arabic, but the poor results seemed to suggest that either the word isn't used in Arabic, or I had a vowel missing or otherwise used the wrong letters in my blind, uninformed guess, so I decided to use the template to call for help. Wikipeditor 00:19, 10 January 2007 (UTC)Reply

If the word is arabic, then there would be no vowel. Arabic, Persian, and a few others utilize what are known as 'short' vowels; they are understood to exist by the reader in the same manner that a English reader knows an 'e' at the end of a word is probably silent, even though it's there. The real issue is that the two letters that are repeated twice are the letters that make 'f' and 'sh' sounds (read from right to left). Thus, it would be 'fesh fesh' rather than 'fech fech'. For it to be 'fech fech', it would have to be Iraqi Dialect Arabic, Persian Farsi, Persian Dari, or one of the other languages that has a 'ch' sound, as traditional Arabic does not. I looked up 'fesh fesh' and 'fech fech' on farsidic.com (a Farsi-English/English-Farsi dictionary) and couldn't find either. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.117.193.157 (talk) 14:55, 8 April 2010 (UTC)Reply

Mannheim 34 removed reference

[edit]

User Mannheim_34 removed this useful reference. I feel it was a reliable source on a non-commercial page. If you agree please restore it. -- Basilicofresco (msg) 12:15, 27 March 2009 (UTC)Reply