That's a nice suggestion. If ϩⲁⲗ(ⲗ)ⲟⲩⲥ was a borrowing from Greek > Egyptian, it would have had to be a very early to change its form so much (like ϩⲁⲩϭⲁⲗ 'anchor' < ἄγκυρα).

Thanks. Yeah, I agree -- I just wonder what the Egyptian derivation is.

It's an interesting word since as far as I know ϩⲁⲗ(ⲗ)ⲟⲩⲥ doesn't have a known Egyptian antecedent and هلّوس/هلّوش isn't used in any other dialect of Arabic or Semitic language. The /u/ vowel suggests non-Egyptian origin but maybe it's related to words for moth, fly, etc. Do you have any ideas?

You might be interested in this: de.cdn-website.com/3e823bf7e865...

www.youtube.com/shorts/EwJvF...

There are similar passages in the Dormition of Mary (de Lagarde, Aegyptiaca, 1883: §15), Death of Joseph (ibid: §23), and the Martyrdom of Epime (Balestri & Hyvernat, Acta Martyrum I, 1908: 139). There are probably more examples in Acta Martyrum volumes.

Looks intriguing but I’m not qualified to comment if these could all be related.

That’s quite the journey

There are many examples like this, such as the word for oasis, where a loan from Coptic to Egyptian Arabic is assumed, but would be better explained as a cognate in my opinion.

I'm sceptical since the same word occurs in multiple Arabic dialects with the meaning quail -- Gulf, Egyptian, Levantine, and Classical (www.livingarabic.com/en/search?q=...). I think this favours a cognate rather than loanword but I'm interested on your view on this.

Are you suggesting it was loaned into Egyptian Arabic from Coptic or that the Egyptian/Coptic and Arabic words are cognates?

Maybe συν θεώ for the right-side, top

I believe Joachim Quack is working on a state of the art Demotic grammar

Just need one for Demotic now

Sure, done

I think this is the end of the sections