MCP HubMCP Hub
스킬 목록으로 돌아가기

research-word-etymology

pjt222
업데이트됨 2 days ago
7 조회
17
2
17
GitHub에서 보기
테스팅wordtestingdata

정보

이 기술은 역사적 언어와 재구성된 원시 어근을 통해 단어의 기원을 추적하며, 여러 언어 계열에 걸친 동족어를 식별합니다. 의미 변화를 연대별 증거와 함께 기록하고, 입증되지 않은 민간 어원설을 표시합니다. 단어의 역사를 탐구하고, 동족어 집합을 비교하며, 잘못된 기원 이야기를 반박하는 데 사용하세요.

빠른 설치

Claude Code

추천
기본
npx skills add pjt222/agent-almanac -a claude-code
플러그인 명령대체
/plugin add https://github.com/pjt222/agent-almanac
Git 클론대체
git clone https://github.com/pjt222/agent-almanac.git ~/.claude/skills/research-word-etymology

Claude Code에서 이 명령을 복사하여 붙여넣어 스킬을 설치하세요

문서

Research Word Etymology

Trace word origin from modern form back through attested historical stages + reconstructed proto-lang roots, ID cognates in related langs, document semantic drift w/ dated evidence, flag folk etymologies.

Use When

  • Investigate origin + historical dev of specific word
  • Compare cognate words across related langs → common ancestor
  • Chart how meaning changed centuries w/ attestation dates
  • Eval whether popular origin story genuine or folk
  • Build structured etymology entry for docs/scholarly ref

In

  • Required: Target word (modern form)
  • Required: Source lang (default English)
  • Optional: Reconstruction depth (default earliest reconstructable; alt: stop at specific historical stage)
  • Optional: Cognate langs (default major branches of same family)
  • Optional: Output format (default structured entry; alt narrative prose)

Do

Step 1: ID Modern Form + First Attestation

Establish current usage + earliest documented appearance.

  1. Record modern spelling, pronunciation (IPA if possible), primary meaning(s) in source lang.

  2. Search earliest attested use in source lang. Consult etymological dicts (OED for English, TLFi for French, DWDS for German) + historical corpora via WebSearch:

Search: "[target word] etymology first attested" site:etymonline.com OR site:oed.com
  1. Record attestation date, source text, meaning at first attestation. Note if modern meaning differs from original.

  2. If word entered source lang via borrowing, ID immediate donor lang + approx borrowing date.

→ Dated first attestation w/ source text ID'd, meaning at first use recorded, immediate donor lang (if borrowed) established.

If err: no attestation date in online sources → note explicit + proceed w/ oldest available evidence. Mark "date uncertain" + continue Step 2.

Step 2: Trace Etymological Chain

Work backward from modern form through documented historical stages → earliest reconstructable root.

  1. Each historical stage record:

    • Form (spelling/transcription)
    • Lang + approx date range
    • Meaning at stage
    • Phonological changes from prev
  2. Follow chain through attested langs first, then into reconstructed proto-langs. Use std notation: asterisk (*) for reconstructed, angle brackets for graphemes, slashes for phonemes.

  3. For Indo-European, typical chain:

    • Modern form (e.g. Modern English, post-1500)
    • Middle period (e.g. Middle English, 1100-1500)
    • Old period (e.g. Old English, 450-1100)
    • Proto-lang (e.g. Proto-Germanic, reconstructed)
    • Deep proto-lang (e.g. PIE, reconstructed)
  4. Borrowed words → trace through each donor before ultimate origin. Latin borrowing in English: Modern English < Old French < Latin < PIE.

  5. Each stage note relevant sound laws explaining phonological changes (e.g. Grimm's Law for PIE→Germanic consonant shifts, Great Vowel Shift for Middle→Modern English vowels).

→ Complete chain modern → earliest reconstructable root, each stage dated, form + meaning recorded, sound changes explained by named phonological rules.

If err: chain breaks at stage (no further ancestor) → mark terminus w/ "origin beyond this point unknown" + proceed Step 3 w/ what's available.

Step 3: ID Cognates Across Families

Find words in related langs descending from same proto-form.

  1. From deepest reconstructed root in Step 2, search reflexes in other branches.

  2. Each cognate record:

    • Lang + modern form
    • Meaning (note semantic divergence from target)
    • Regular sound correspondences connecting to proto-form
  3. Group cognates by branch. PIE typical branches: Germanic, Italic (Romance), Celtic, Hellenic, Balto-Slavic, Indo-Iranian, Armenian, Albanian, Tocharian, Anatolian.

  4. Verify cognates → check sound correspondences regular (systematic across multi word sets), not just superficial. False cognates (look-alikes from unrelated roots) flagged + excluded.

  5. Format cognate set as comparison table:

Root: PIE *[root] "[meaning]"
├── Germanic: English [form], German [form], Old Norse [form]
├── Italic: Latin [form] > French [form], Spanish [form], Italian [form]
├── Hellenic: Greek [form]
├── Balto-Slavic: Russian [form], Lithuanian [form]
└── Indo-Iranian: Sanskrit [form], Persian [form]

→ Cognate set w/ ≥3 branches (where root has reflexes), each verified by regular correspondences, false cognates explicitly excluded.

If err: root has few cognates (common for domain-specific or culturally bound vocab) → document what exists + note limited distribution. Word has no cognates outside immediate branch → state + explain (substrate borrowing or innovation).

Step 4: Document Semantic Drift

Chart how meaning changed proto-root → modern form.

  1. Each stage of chain (Step 2) record primary meaning. Multi senses coexist → note all.

  2. Classify each meaning change by std categories:

    • Narrowing (specialization): meaning becomes more specific (e.g. "deer" once any animal)
    • Broadening (generalization): meaning becomes more general (e.g. "dog" once specific breed)
    • Amelioration: meaning more positive (e.g. "knight" servant → noble warrior)
    • Pejoration: meaning more negative (e.g. "villain" farmworker → evildoer)
    • Metaphor: shifts via analogy (e.g. "mouse" rodent → computer device)
    • Metonymy: shifts via association (e.g. "crown" headwear → monarchy)
  3. Provide approx date of each shift where attestation supports.

  4. Format drift as timeline:

Semantic drift: [word]
  [date/period]: "[meaning]" ([source])
  [date/period]: "[meaning]" — [drift type] ([source])
  [date/period]: "[meaning]" — [drift type] ([source])
  Present:       "[meaning]"

→ Dated semantic drift timeline w/ at least original + modern meanings, each shift classified, attestation sources cited.

If err: intermediate stages lack clear attestation → note gap explicit ("semantic shift X to Y between [date range] but mechanism not attested") + proceed.

Step 5: Flag Folk Etymologies

ID + eval popular but incorrect origin stories.

  1. Search common folk etymologies, backronyms, urban legends:
Search: "[target word] folk etymology" OR "[target word] myth origin" OR "[target word] false etymology"
  1. Each folk found document:

    • Claimed origin story
    • Why linguistically unsupported (anachronistic, phonologically impossible, no attestation)
    • Likely reason became popular (satisfying narrative, apparent plausibility, memorable acronym)
  2. No folk etymologies for word → state explicit, no omit section.

  3. Use clear verdict markers:

    • Confirmed: Supported by linguistic evidence
    • Probable: Well-supported but not conclusively proven
    • Speculative: Possible but lacking sufficient evidence
    • Folk etymology (unsupported): Popular but contradicted by evidence
    • Backronym: Acronym invented after the word already existed

→ Folk etymologies ID'd + debunked w/ linguistic evidence, or explicit statement none known.

If err: status of claimed etymology genuinely uncertain (legitimate scholarly debate) → present both sides w/ citations not force verdict. Mark "disputed" w/ competing hypotheses.

Step 6: Format Structured Entry

Compile findings → standardized output.

  1. Assemble entry w/ structure:
## Etymology: [word]

**Modern form**: [word] ([language], [part of speech])
**Pronunciation**: /[IPA]/
**First attested**: [date], [source text/author]

### Etymological Chain
[Modern form] ([language], [date])
  < [intermediate form] ([language], [date]) "[meaning]"
  < [older form] ([language], [date]) "[meaning]"
  < *[proto-form] ([proto-language]) "[reconstructed meaning]"

### Cognates
[Cognate table from Step 3]

### Semantic Drift
[Timeline from Step 4]

### Folk Etymologies
[Findings from Step 5, or "None known"]

### Sources
[Etymological dictionaries and corpora consulted]

### Confidence
[Overall confidence level: certain / probable / speculative / contested]
[Notes on any gaps or uncertainties in the analysis]
  1. Review entry for internal consistency: chain matches cognate set? Drift timeline aligns w/ attestation dates?

  2. Add confidence assessment for overall etymology, note weak links.

→ Complete internally consistent etymology w/ all sections, sources cited, confidence marked.

If err: section couldn't complete (no cognates, no folk known) → include section w/ explicit "not applicable" or "insufficient evidence" note, no omit.

Check

  • Modern form + first attestation recorded w/ date + source
  • Chain traces ≥2 historical stages (or notes why fewer)
  • Reconstructed forms use std notation (asterisk prefix)
  • Cognate set has words from ≥2 branches (where available)
  • Sound correspondences cited regular (not ad hoc resemblances)
  • Semantic drift timeline dated w/ classified shift types
  • Folk etymologies addressed (debunked or noted absent)
  • Sources cited (dict names, corpus names, URLs)
  • Confidence level explicit
  • Entry internally consistent (chain, cognates, drift align)

Traps

  • Surface resemblance for cognacy: Look-alike words across langs not necessarily related (e.g. English "much" + Spanish "mucho" diff roots). Always verify regular correspondences not visual similarity.
  • Confuse borrowing w/ inheritance: Word in 2 related langs may be borrowed not inherited from common ancestor. Check phonological form vs expected sound-law outcomes.
  • Treat reconstructed as attested: PIE roots + other proto-forms = scholarly hypotheses not historical docs. Always mark asterisks + note reconstructed.
  • Accept folk etymologies uncritically: Popular origins often more memorable than correct. Always check attestation + phonological plausibility.
  • Ignore semantic drift: Modern meaning may be very diff from original. Tracing only form w/o meaning → misleading.
  • Stop too early: Online sources give only 1-2 stages. Push back to deepest reconstruction for complete picture.

  • manage-memory — document etymology research findings for persistent ref across sessions
  • argumentation — build + eval arguments about contested etymologies

GitHub 저장소

pjt222/agent-almanac
경로: i18n/caveman-ultra/skills/research-word-etymology
0
agentsagentskillsai-assisted-developmentclaude-codeskillsteams

연관 스킬

evaluating-llms-harness

테스팅

이 Claude Skill은 MMLU, GSM8K를 포함한 60개 이상의 표준화된 학술 과제에서 LLM 성능을 벤치마크하기 위해 lm-evaluation-harness를 실행합니다. 개발자들이 모델 품질을 비교하고, 학습 진행 상황을 추적하거나 학술 결과를 보고할 수 있도록 설계되었습니다. 이 도구는 HuggingFace와 vLLM 모델을 포함한 다양한 백엔드를 지원합니다.

스킬 보기

cloudflare-cron-triggers

테스팅

이 스킬은 cron 표현식을 사용하여 Worker를 스케줄링하기 위한 Cloudflare Cron Triggers 구현에 관한 포괄적인 지식을 제공합니다. 주기적 작업, 유지보수 작업, 자동화된 워크플로우 설정 방법을 다루며, 잘못된 cron 표현식이나 시간대 문제 같은 일반적인 이슈들을 해결하는 방법을 포함합니다. 개발자들은 이를 통해 스케줄된 핸들러 구성, cron 트리거 테스트, Workflows 및 Green Compute와의 연동 작업을 수행할 수 있습니다.

스킬 보기

webapp-testing

테스팅

이 Claude Skill은 Python 스크립트를 통해 로컬 웹 애플리케이션을 테스트하기 위한 Playwright 기반 툴킷을 제공합니다. 프론트엔드 검증, UI 디버깅, 스크린샷 캡처, 로그 확인 기능을 지원하며 서버 라이프사이클을 관리합니다. 브라우저 자동화 작업에 사용하되 컨텍스트 오염을 방지하기 위해 소스 코드를 읽지 않고 스크립트를 직접 실행하세요.

스킬 보기

finishing-a-development-branch

테스팅

이 스킬은 테스트 통과를 확인한 후 체계적인 통합 옵션을 제시하여 개발자가 완성된 작업을 마무리하도록 돕습니다. 구현이 완료된 후 머지, PR 생성, 브랜치 정리와 같은 워크플로우를 안내합니다. 코드가 준비되고 테스트가 완료되었을 때 개발 프로세스를 체계적으로 마무리하기 위해 사용하세요.

스킬 보기