胳
| ||||||||
Translingual
Han character
胳 (Kangxi radical 130, 肉+6, 10 strokes, cangjie input 月竹水口 (BHER), four-corner 77264, composition ⿰月各)
References
- KangXi: page 980, character 25
- Dai Kanwa Jiten: character 29434
- Dae Jaweon: page 1432, character 25
- Hanyu Da Zidian (first edition): volume 3, page 2070, character 4
- Unihan data for U+80F3
Chinese
| trad. | 胳 | |
|---|---|---|
| simp. # | 胳 | |
Glyph origin
| Historical forms of the character 胳 |
|---|
| Shuowen Jiezi (compiled in Han) |
| Small seal script |
 |
| Old Chinese | |
|---|---|
| 髂 | *kʰraːɡs |
| 路 | *ɡ·raːɡs |
| 輅 | *ɡ·raːɡs |
| 賂 | *ɡ·raːɡs |
| 虂 | *ɡ·raːɡs |
| 露 | *ɡ·raːɡs |
| 潞 | *raːɡs |
| 鷺 | *raːɡs |
| 璐 | *raːɡs |
| 簬 | *raːɡs |
| 簵 | *ɡ·raːɡs |
| 洛 | *ɡ·raːɡ |
| 駱 | *ɡ·raːɡ |
| 絡 | *ɡ·raːɡ |
| 酪 | *ɡ·raːɡ |
| 烙 | *ɡ·raːɡ |
| 雒 | *ɡ·raːɡ |
| 珞 | *ɡ·raːɡ |
| 硌 | *ɡ·raːɡ |
| 袼 | *ɡ·raːɡ, *klaːɡ |
| 笿 | *ɡ·raːɡ |
| 鉻 | *ɡ·raːɡ, *kraːɡ |
| 鮥 | *ɡ·raːɡ |
| 鵅 | *ɡ·raːɡ, *kraːɡ |
| 挌 | *ɡ·raːɡ, *kraːɡ |
| 落 | *ɡ·raːɡ |
| 各 | *klaːɡ |
| 胳 | *klaːɡ |
| 閣 | *klaːɡ |
| 格 | *klaːɡ, *kraːɡ |
| 擱 | *klaːɡ |
| 恪 | *kʰlaːɡ |
| 愙 | *kʰaːɡ |
| 貉 | *ɡlaːɡ, *mɡraːɡ |
| 狢 | *ɡlaːɡ |
| 佫 | *ɡlaːɡ |
| 略 | *ɡ·raɡ |
| 茖 | *kraːɡ |
| 骼 | *kraːɡ |
| 觡 | *kraːɡ |
| 蛒 | *kraːɡ |
| 敋 | *kraːɡ |
| 客 | *kʰraːɡ |
| 喀 | *kʰraːɡ |
| 揢 | *kʰraːɡ |
| 額 | *ŋɡraːɡ |
| 峉 | *ŋɡraːɡ |
| 頟 | *ŋɡraːɡ |
| 詻 | *ŋɡraːɡ |
| 垎 | *ɡraːɡ |
| 楁 | *ɡraːɡ |
Phono-semantic compound (形聲, OC *klaːɡ) : semantic 肉 (“flesh”) + phonetic 各 (OC *klaːɡ).
Etymology
Possibly from Proto-Sino-Tibetan *lak ~ *C-jak (“arm; hand; wing”). Sagart (1999) considers it to be a prefixed form of a root *lak, found unprefixed as 亦 (OC *ᵇlak, “armpit”) and with a loosely attached prefix as *ᵃkə-lak, preserved in some southern varieties, such as Cantonese 胳肋底 (gaak3 laak6-1 dai2), Min Dong 胳腋下 (gó̤k-lŏ̤k-â). In the new reconstruction by Baxter and Sagart (2014), the connection to 亦 (OC *[ɢ](r)Ak) is still implied (cf. Sagart, 2007), but the comparison to the forms in the southern varieties no longer holds (Hill, 2019). Zhang, Jacques and Lai (2019) compare it with Tibetan ལག (lag, “arm”), Japhug tɯ-jaʁ (“arm”) and suggest that the comparisons are more compatible with an Old Chinese reconstruction such as *klˁak.
Alternatively, Schuessler (2007) reconstructs the Old Chinese minimally as *kâk < *klak and posits an Austroasiatic origin, comparing it to Proto-Monic *knlak (“popliteal space; armpit”), Khmer ក្លៀក (kliək, “armpit”), both from Proto-Mon-Khmer *kʔik ~ *kʔiək ~ *kʔaik (“armpit”).