Etymology style — Nirukta markers vs Western cf.

A frozen exploratory witness of how five Cologne dictionaries mark etymology / derivation. The claim is descriptive, not a new inference: WIL (1832) still writes Nirukta-style affix notation inside .E. blocks (aff., c., neg. …), while later Western editions (MW72, MW) shift to comparativist cf. cross-references. Apte editions sit in between with sparse morphology tags and almost no cf..

Source probes live in csl-observatory as frozen CSVs; this atlas page only renders them (dictionary microstructure belongs here per BOUNDARY_RULES.md). Not a full 44-dict census.

Nirukta-style .E. share by dictionary

Percent of entries carrying a Nirukta-style etymology block (Wilson's .E. notation). Only WIL is non-zero in this spike — the later sample has already dropped the indigenous affix apparatus.

Western cf. count by dictionary

Raw cf. hit counts (comparativist cross-reference style). MW72 and MW dominate; WIL has zero in this probe.

Timeline — year × Nirukta .E. share

Connected scatter (slope chart) of the same five dictionaries by publication year. The drop from WIL 1832 (~89%) to every later point (0%) is the visual of the style shift; it is not a regression over the full CDSL set.

WIL Nirukta tokens (top abbreviations)

Top tokens counted inside WIL .E. blocks. aff. (affix / pratyaya) alone is ~14.7k — the indigenous derivation apparatus is affix-notation-heavy, not cf.-heavy.

Full tables

Marker summary (5 dictionaries)

WIL token inventory

Chart Trust Block