@Sergio, you can't logically claim that someone from the US is a "norteamericano" and then claim that you, from SOUTH America, are an American ... You would be a South American. A North American would be anyone from North America which includes Mexico and Canada not just from the USA. ... By the way, Mexico is officially the "United States of Mexico" but no one ever gets confused about which country they're talking about when they say, "estados unidos". Folks from the Unites States of Mexico are Mexicans and folks from the Unites States of America are Americans ... It really is just that simple.

Americans are from America (singular) ... not from the Americas (plural) and usually the Americas are referred to as the Western Hemisphere so the word Americas, while it does exist, is seldom noted.

Also, it may sound kind of thuggish, but America was the first nation to claim the name for both the country and its citizens ... Americans started using it before anyone else in Western Hemisphere even thought about being called anything but a citizen of their respectiv European countries. First come, first serve.

If you're insulted by it ... too bad. When I'm in S. America I don't hav a problem with telling folks, "Soy Americano" any more than telling someone in Germany, "Ich bin Amerikaner." No one has, yet, has said anything about it and if they did, I'd giv them an earful.

Here is what I was told:

for what it's worth, apparently they are not considered cognate words. According to Buck, O.E. irre (n.) is from the adjective, which meant "wandering," and is from the root that also produced Latin errare. The sense connection seems difficult and interesting to me, but they compare Old High German irri "wandering, deranged," also "angry."

---

Yes, there was an adj. witt of "wandering, deranged" but that was only one witt:

From B-T:
irre, yrre; adj.
I. Gone astray, wandering, confused, perverse, depraved
II. angry, enraged, wrathful, indignant :--
And ierre hé hwearf ðonan - and he went away in a rage, Chr. 584; Erl, 18, 25.
Iorra iratus, Rtl. 179, 36.
Hwí eart ðú yrre - Why art thou angry? Gen. 4, 6.

---

As long as we're on odd words. I think yu'v touched on this before ... German/germane

The word german is from Latin germanus but yet I think that it is likely from the Teutonic tribes … OE gemæne … common, general, mutual. …
Ðæt hí sceoldon habban sunu him gemǽne - that they should have a son common to them
Ðæt sceal Geáta leódum and Gár-Denum sib gemǽnum - so that there shall be peace to the Goths' people and to the Gar-Danes in general … There was also: gemænelic (general).

The question was put to me: Why is that so many others ... like the OED ... don't even mention OE irre/yrre?

It's not like yrre wasn't noted ... It was ... a lot! It is found in OE translations of the Bible ... Beowulf. For that matter ... I would guess that there was a Frankish shape of it as well so even the upspringing of it in French could be Frankish or a blend of Frankish and Latin.

We find "irre" in the Ormulum, c1200. So I'm at a loss as to why the MED doesn't list it. Insted, the first infare is c1300.

I'm not a conspiracy buff. There must be some witcrafty (logical) reasun as to why OE irre/yrre is overlooked.

1275 (Eært þu þenne cheues-boren þat þu wult beon for-loren?) is the last reference that I'v found to chevesborn/chivesborn except for the Anglishmoot and one other forum entry.

The thing to kno about wiktionary is that it breaks English into OE, ME, and English (meaning aft-1500 English). So when an admin says that it isn't English, he means it isn't aft-1500 English. I'v had a few bruising battles over the way they do it but it is the way it is. There are a lot of words that fall into that 1500-1800 year gap that it is hard to find support for ... so words that likely made it that far likely to be listed as ME rather than "English" unless a reference can be found. Yes, I kno ... ME is English ... and that's one of the fights that I'v had but it's their rules.

But even having it under ME is better than not having it at all.

Also, that admin note means that someone took the likely nowadays build of the word from OE with no support. Wikt doesn't let that happen. Yu hav to hav support that the word is truly being noted (three infares/ingangs [entries] in sunder books or a searchable archived website, usenet, or forum by sunder folks [in other words, not from the same person or book and over a span of at least one year] ... googlegroups is one that is acceptable). So, the way to build upstay for an wikt infare it to get out and note the word ... and hav others note the word in groups, blogs, forums that are permanently archived. I can tell yu that the Anglishmoot won't count since it is where words are built.

I say this all the time ... yu hav to get out and note these words to work them into (or back into) the tung and the wordbooks.

Found OHG irri ... So now it becomes whether irri came from Latin or not.

@chivesborn ... I didn't kenlook/kenseek (research) as to why chivesborn was deleted but I'm guessing that there wasn't enuff historical upstay for it. If one can find it three times in Googlebooks, then it might could be put in again.

ofost f. haste, speed, zeal, Æ. adv. -lîce. on ofoste, of(e)stum speedily, hastily.

Here's another odd one: rêoc savage, furious

Doesn't truly seem akin to:

rêocan I. to emit smoke, steam, 'reek,' II. = rêcan ... (rêcan I. pret. 3 sg. rêhte to fumigate, expose to smoke [v. 'reak'] II. = reccan)

rêocende (ê) smoking, steaming ['reeking']

If impact, the noun, means the effect, then there is nothing lame about impact, the verb, meaning to affect.

BTW, impact was a verb before it was a noun:

impact (n.)
1781, "collision," from impact (v.). Figurative sense of "forceful impression" is from 1817 (Coleridge).

impact (v.)
c.1600, "press closely into something," from L. impactus, pp. of impingere "to push into, dash against, thrust at". Originally sense preserved in impacted teeth (1876). Sense of "strike forcefully against something" first recorded 1916. Figurative sense of "have a forceful effect on" is from 1935.

@Gallitrot ... FYI, the chivesborn wikt. infare (entry) has been deleted.

---

I am writing another sci-fi short-tale and I needed a word for data ... kenbit(s) (Ken=knowledge + bit) ... kenbit for datum and kenbits for data. It fits and it's short.

The noting of "boy" for servant is common across indo-euro. tungs ... for byspel, garcon (French for boy/waiter); ME knave; OE cnight (which became knight). Given that one would often shout for a servant ... BOY! Then it's not amazing that it became an interjection.

If someone told me that he "literally went thru the roof", then I would think that that he fell thru the roof.

ire (given as c1300) said to from from O.Fr. ire "anger, wrath, violence" (11c.), from L. ira "anger, wrath, rage, passion," from PIE root *eis-, forming various words denoting "passion".

Either the date is wrong and it came a-rood into English before c1300 or there is a Germanic root somewhere.

Godes yrre bær — God's anger bore — Beowulf, 711.

Begotten shapes:

irringa — angrily
irremōd - angry mood, angry-minded
irreweorc - work done in anger

---

grudge - late Middle English: variant of obsolete grutch ‘complain, murmur, grumble’ from Old French grouchier, groucher, groucer, grocer, of unknown origin.

Am I alone in thinking this must hav a Germanic/Teutonic root? German groll; English grunt, grumble