{
  "id": "LB-en-abandon-033",
  "slug": "abandon",
  "title": {
    "en": "ABANDON · 放弃 — Meaning first, consonant second",
    "zh-Hans": "ABANDON · 放弃 — 先定语义，再验辅音"
  },
  "languages": [
    {
      "role": "source",
      "code": "en",
      "name": "English",
      "word": "abandon",
      "pronunciation": "/əˈbæn.dən/",
      "part_of_speech": "verb · 动词"
    },
    {
      "role": "standard-translation",
      "code": "zh-Hans",
      "name": "Chinese",
      "word": "放弃／抛弃／离弃／遗弃",
      "pronunciation": "fàngqì / pāoqì / líqì / yíqì"
    },
    {
      "role": "standard-equivalent",
      "code": "fr",
      "name": "French",
      "word": "abandonner",
      "pronunciation": "/a.bɑ̃.dɔ.ne/"
    },
    {
      "role": "active-association",
      "code": "zh-Hans",
      "name": "Chinese",
      "word": "旁",
      "pronunciation": "páng"
    }
  ],
  "primary_mapping": {
    "mapping_id": "MAP-abandon-primary",
    "source": {
      "language": "English",
      "word": "abandon",
      "pronunciation": "/əˈbæn.dən/"
    },
    "target": {
      "language": "Chinese",
      "word": "放弃／抛弃／离弃／遗弃",
      "pronunciation": "fàngqì / pāoqì / líqì / yíqì"
    },
    "gloss": {
      "en": "give up; leave or withdraw support, depending on context",
      "zh-Hans": "放弃／抛弃／离弃；依语境亦译遗弃"
    },
    "meaning": {
      "en": "Whole-word mapping: abandon ↔ 放 fàng, selected by LET GO/RELEASE semantics, then compared as b ↔ f. Root mapping: bandon ↔ 办 bàn, independently evaluated. Both are Phonetic-Semantic Candidates with Historical Relation: Not claimed. Standard Translation: 放弃 / 抛弃 / 离弃 / 遗弃 (Supported). Active Association and related candidates remain secondary.",
      "zh-Hans": "整词映射 abandon ↔ 放 fàng：先依据 LET GO／RELEASE，再比较 b ↔ f。词根映射 bandon ↔ 办 bàn 独立评估。两者均为 Phonetic-Semantic Candidate，Historical Relation: Not claimed。标准翻译为放弃／抛弃／离弃／遗弃（Supported）；主动联系及相关候选保留为次级。"
    },
    "mapping_type": "Supported standard translation; separate Active Association and related candidates",
    "rationale": {
      "en": "Translation Status = Supported; primary lexical Mapping Status = Supported; Active Association Status = Author-proposed; related candidate statuses are independently graded. Historical Relation = Not claimed concerns the cross-language associations, not the documented French-to-English borrowing.",
      "zh-Hans": "Translation Status＝Supported；主要词义 Mapping Status＝Supported；Active Association Status＝Author-proposed；相关候选逐项分级。Historical Relation＝Not claimed 针对跨语言联想，不否定已记录的法语到英语借词史。"
    }
  },
  "entry_status": "Published",
  "mapping_status": "Supported",
  "mapping_level": "C",
  "historical_relation_status": "Not claimed",
  "evidence": {
    "Historical": {
      "status": "Established",
      "confidence": "High",
      "summary": {
        "en": "Middle English abandounen (English verb attested in the 14th century) was borrowed from Anglo-French abanduner, derived from abandun and a bandun, referring to power or disposal. Continental Old French à bandon likewise concerns disposal; abandonner is derived from abandon (CNRTL records releasing a rein around 1100 and leaving entirely from the 12th century). This supports the development toward relinquish/give up. It is not historically ban + donner. Bandon belongs to a Germanic command/jurisdiction background; this is not the author’s modern segmentation. Bandon itself means power/authority, not release. The displayed pathway is a semantic abstraction, not a strict chronology of first attestations.",
        "zh-Hans": "中古英语 abandounen（英语动词见于14世纪）借自盎格鲁法语 abanduner，后者由 abandun 及 a bandun 发展，涉及支配与处置。欧洲大陆古法语 à bandon 同样涉及任其处置；abandonner 派生自 abandon（CNRTL 记约1100年的松开缰绳义及12世纪起的完全离开义）。这支持向 relinquish/give up 的语义发展。历史上不是 ban + donner。bandon 具有日耳曼语命令／管辖词族背景，但不是作者提出的现代拆分。 bandon 本身为权力／支配，不是释放。展示路径是语义抽象，不是首见年代的严格序列。"
      },
      "items": [
        {
          "evidence_id": "HIST-ABANDON-001",
          "claim": {
            "en": "Middle English abandounen (English verb attested in the 14th century) was borrowed from Anglo-French abanduner, derived from abandun and a bandun, referring to power or disposal. Continental Old French à bandon likewise concerns disposal; abandonner is derived from abandon (CNRTL records releasing a rein around 1100 and leaving entirely from the 12th century). This supports the development toward relinquish/give up. It is not historically ban + donner. Bandon belongs to a Germanic command/jurisdiction background; this is not the author’s modern segmentation.",
            "zh-Hans": "中古英语 abandounen（英语动词见于14世纪）借自盎格鲁法语 abanduner，后者由 abandun 及 a bandun 发展，涉及支配与处置。欧洲大陆古法语 à bandon 同样涉及任其处置；abandonner 派生自 abandon（CNRTL 记约1100年的松开缰绳义及12世纪起的完全离开义）。这支持向 relinquish/give up 的语义发展。历史上不是 ban + donner。bandon 具有日耳曼语命令／管辖词族背景，但不是作者提出的现代拆分。"
          },
          "status": "Established",
          "confidence": "High",
          "source_refs": [
            "REF-MW-ABANDON",
            "REF-CNRTL-ABANDON",
            "REF-CNRTL-ABANDONNER"
          ]
        },
        {
          "evidence_id": "HIST-BAN-001",
          "claim": {
            "en": "English ban (verb) continues Old English bannan, a Germanic proclamation/command verb; Middle English prohibitive senses reflect Norse influence, with later French/Latin influence. The English noun partly derives from the verb and partly from Anglo-French. French ban /bɑ̃/ is a masculine noun of Old Low Franconian origin: public proclamation, feudal summons/jurisdiction, banns, and exclusion in expressions such as mettre au ban. It is not the ordinary French verb “to prohibit” (interdire); the old note’s French ban v. 禁止 is corrected. This distinction does not cancel the independently proposed English ban ↔ 甭 candidate.",
            "zh-Hans": "英语动词 ban 承自古英语 bannan，属于日耳曼语宣告／命令词族；中古英语禁止等义受古诺斯语影响，后又受法语／拉丁语影响。英语名词部分来自动词，部分借自盎格鲁法语。法语 ban /bɑ̃/ 为阳性名词，源于古低地法兰克语，涉及公告、封建征召／管辖、婚姻公告及 mettre au ban 等排斥用语；它不是通常表示“禁止”的法语动词（interdire）。旧笔记“法语 ban v. 禁止”已纠正，这不取消独立的英语 ban ↔ 甭 候选。"
          },
          "status": "Established",
          "confidence": "High",
          "source_refs": [
            "REF-MW-BAN",
            "REF-ACADEMIE-BAN",
            "REF-ZDIC-BENG",
            "REF-LANGUAGESBOOK-ABANDON",
            "REF-AUTHOR-ABANDON-20260907"
          ]
        },
        {
          "evidence_id": "HIST-BANAL-001",
          "claim": {
            "en": "English banal is borrowed from French (Merriam-Webster: first known English use 1825). CNRTL traces French banal to feudal ban plus -al, with bannel attested in 1247 and the very common/unoriginal sense in 1798. Merriam-Webster describes a Medieval Latin bannalis route for Old French bannel. Both accounts connect seigneurial jurisdiction and shared-use facilities with the later commonplace sense. Neither derives it from Chinese. Ban and banal are separately evaluated observations, but their related European histories must be deduplicated in any family-based experiment.",
            "zh-Hans": "英语 banal 借自法语（Merriam-Webster 记英语首见1825年）。CNRTL 将法语 banal 分析为封建法 ban 加 -al，记1247年 bannel 及1798年的极普通／无新意义；Merriam-Webster 则通过中古拉丁语 bannalis 解释古法语 bannel。两者均联系领主管辖、共同使用设施与后来的平常义，不从汉语倒推词史。ban 和 banal 的观察独立评价，但欧洲词史相关，实验按词源家族去重。"
          },
          "status": "Established",
          "confidence": "High",
          "source_refs": [
            "REF-CNRTL-BANAL",
            "REF-MW-BANAL",
            "REF-ZDIC-YIBAN",
            "REF-LANGUAGESBOOK-ABANDON",
            "REF-AUTHOR-ABANDON-20260907"
          ]
        }
      ],
      "source_refs": [
        "REF-MW-ABANDON",
        "REF-CNRTL-ABANDON",
        "REF-CNRTL-ABANDONNER",
        "REF-MW-BAN",
        "REF-ACADEMIE-BAN",
        "REF-ZDIC-BENG",
        "REF-LANGUAGESBOOK-ABANDON",
        "REF-AUTHOR-ABANDON-20260907",
        "REF-CNRTL-BANAL",
        "REF-MW-BANAL",
        "REF-ZDIC-YIBAN"
      ]
    },
    "Phonetic-Semantic": {
      "status": "Candidate",
      "confidence": "Low",
      "summary": {
        "en": "Whole-word mapping: abandon ↔ 放 fàng, selected by LET GO/RELEASE semantics, then compared as b ↔ f. Root mapping: bandon ↔ 办 bàn, independently evaluated. Both are Phonetic-Semantic Candidates with Historical Relation: Not claimed. Standard Translation: 放弃 / 抛弃 / 离弃 / 遗弃 (Supported). Active Association and related candidates remain secondary.",
        "zh-Hans": "整词映射 abandon ↔ 放 fàng：先依据 LET GO／RELEASE，再比较 b ↔ f。词根映射 bandon ↔ 办 bàn 独立评估。两者均为 Phonetic-Semantic Candidate，Historical Relation: Not claimed。标准翻译为放弃／抛弃／离弃／遗弃（Supported）；主动联系及相关候选保留为次级。"
      },
      "items": [
        {
          "evidence_id": "MAP-ABANDON-FANG-PHONETICS",
          "claim": {
            "en": "Compare the /b/ after initial /ə/ in English abandon with Mandarin f /f/ in fàng: b ↔ f falls within the proposed b-p-m-f group. This is a medial-to-initial segment comparison, not whole-word homophony; voicing, place/manner, remaining segments and tone differ. Group membership does not prove a sound law or historical relation.",
            "zh-Hans": "比较英语 abandon 起始 /ə/ 后的 /b/ 与普通话 fàng 的 f /f/：b ↔ f 落入候选 b-p-m-f 组。这是词中到词首的片段比较，不是整词同音；清浊、发音部位／方式、其余音段及声调存在差异。同组不证明音变规律或历史关系。"
          },
          "status": "Candidate",
          "confidence": "Low",
          "source_refs": [
            "REF-CNRTL-ABANDONNER",
            "REF-ZDIC-FANG",
            "REF-MW-ABANDON"
          ]
        },
        {
          "evidence_id": "MAP-ABANDON-FANG-SEMANTICS",
          "claim": {
            "en": "Whole-word mapping: abandon ↔ 放 fàng. Select 放 for LET GO / RELEASE before comparing sound. CNRTL records release of a rein around 1100 in the French history, and Chinese 放 has an independently documented release sense. This is a scoped historical-semantic bridge, not a claim that 放 alone translates every modern use of abandon.",
            "zh-Hans": "整词映射：abandon ↔ 放 fàng。先按 LET GO／RELEASE 选择“放”，再比较声音。CNRTL 记法语词史中约1100年的松开缰绳义；汉语“放”另有独立的释放义证据。这是限定语义的历时联系，不表示单字“放”可翻译 abandon 的所有现代用法。"
          },
          "status": "Candidate",
          "confidence": "Low",
          "source_refs": [
            "REF-CNRTL-ABANDONNER",
            "REF-ZDIC-FANG",
            "REF-MW-ABANDON"
          ]
        },
        {
          "evidence_id": "PHONSEM-ABANDON-001",
          "claim": {
            "en": "English ban ↔ 甭 béng: Phonetic-Semantic Candidate; semantic strength moderate; overall confidence Low; Historical Relation: Not claimed. The overlap is contextual DON’T / DO NOT / PROHIBIT. English ban often means formal prohibition; 甭 commonly means no need/do not and need not prohibit. English /bæn/ and béng show an author-observed labial onset and loose rhyme resemblance, not homophony: Pinyin b is unaspirated /p/, English b is /b/, final /n/ versus /ŋ/, vowels and tone differ.",
            "zh-Hans": "英语 ban ↔ 甭 béng：Phonetic-Semantic Candidate；语义强度 moderate，整体置信度 Low；Historical Relation: Not claimed。交点限于语境中的 DON’T / DO NOT / PROHIBIT。ban 常表正式禁止，“甭”常表不用／不必／不要，不总是禁止。/bæn/ 与 béng 的双唇起音及宽泛韵部近似仅为作者观察，并非同音：拼音 b 为不送气 /p/，英语 b 为 /b/，韵尾 /n/ 与 /ŋ/、元音和声调有别。"
          },
          "status": "Candidate",
          "confidence": "Low",
          "source_refs": [
            "REF-MW-BAN",
            "REF-ACADEMIE-BAN",
            "REF-ZDIC-BENG",
            "REF-LANGUAGESBOOK-ABANDON",
            "REF-AUTHOR-ABANDON-20260907"
          ]
        },
        {
          "evidence_id": "PHONSEM-BANAL-001",
          "claim": {
            "en": "banal ↔ 般 bān / 一般: Phonetic-Semantic Candidate; semantic strength moderate; overall confidence Low; Historical Relation: Not claimed. The semantic anchor is the word 一般 in its ordinary/common sense, not an assertion that isolated 般 always means ordinary. Modern banal often adds a negative sense of unoriginal or trite that 一般 need not carry. French /ba.nal/ permits a partial ban- versus bān comparison; English pronunciations vary. Unmatched /al/, vowels, voicing and Mandarin tone remain limitations.",
            "zh-Hans": "banal ↔ 般 bān / 一般：Phonetic-Semantic Candidate；语义强度 moderate，整体置信度 Low；Historical Relation: Not claimed。语义依据是“一般”的普通／通常义，不主张单字“般”总有普通义。现代 banal 常含陈腐、无新意的贬义，“一般”未必如此。法语 /ba.nal/ 可与 bān 作局部 ban- 音近观察；英语有多种读法。未对应的 /al/、元音、清浊与汉语声调仍是限制。"
          },
          "status": "Candidate",
          "confidence": "Low",
          "source_refs": [
            "REF-CNRTL-BANAL",
            "REF-MW-BANAL",
            "REF-ZDIC-YIBAN",
            "REF-LANGUAGESBOOK-ABANDON",
            "REF-AUTHOR-ABANDON-20260907"
          ]
        },
        {
          "evidence_id": "MAP-BANDON-BAN-SEMANTICS",
          "claim": {
            "en": "Bandon means POWER/AUTHORITY; disposal belongs to the relational phrase à bandon. Modern 办/辦 means handle/manage, prepare or deal with. 说文新附 glosses 辦 as exert effort (致力), not authority. Thus bandon ↔ 办 is a limited control/handling association: Low semantic fit for POWER/AUTHORITY, Medium only for a contextual handling/disposal comparison. It is not an exact root translation. 权柄 is the stronger meaning-first support for authority regardless of its sound.",
            "zh-Hans": "bandon 的核心是 POWER/AUTHORITY；任其处置关系属于 à bandon。现代办／辦为处理、办理、筹备等；《说文新附》释辦为致力，不是权力。因此 bandon ↔ 办仅保留为支配／办理的有限联系：对权力本义语义适配 Low，只有在处理／处置语境比较时为 Medium，不是词根的精确译词。权柄是更合适的权力义支持，其声音不决定选择。"
          },
          "status": "Phonetic-Semantic Candidate",
          "confidence": "Low",
          "source_refs": [
            "REF-CNRTL-ABANDON",
            "REF-ZDIC-BAN-HANDLE",
            "REF-ZDIC-BAN-TRADITIONAL"
          ]
        },
        {
          "evidence_id": "MAP-BANDON-BAN-PHONETICS",
          "claim": {
            "en": "b ↔ b → same consonant / within b-p-m-f group is the author’s comparison label. It compares the initial b of bandon with Pinyin b in bàn. Pinyin b represents unaspirated /p/; the label is not proof of identical phonetic realization, homophony, or a historical sound law. A source-specific historical French pronunciation and the remaining consonants, vowels and tone still need independent assessment. Group fit cannot upgrade weak semantics.",
            "zh-Hans": "b ↔ b → same consonant / within b-p-m-f group 是作者的对应标签：比较 bandon 的词首 b 与 bàn 的拼音 b。拼音 b 表示不送气 /p/；此标签不证明实际音值完全相同、同音或历史音变规律。古法语具体时期的读音及其余辅音、元音、汉语声调仍须独立评估。落入预测组不能提升较弱的语义证据。"
          },
          "status": "Phonetic-Semantic Candidate",
          "confidence": "Low",
          "source_refs": [
            "REF-CNRTL-ABANDON",
            "REF-ZDIC-BAN-HANDLE",
            "REF-ZDIC-BAN-TRADITIONAL"
          ]
        }
      ],
      "source_refs": [
        "REF-MW-BAN",
        "REF-ACADEMIE-BAN",
        "REF-ZDIC-BENG",
        "REF-LANGUAGESBOOK-ABANDON",
        "REF-AUTHOR-ABANDON-20260907",
        "REF-CNRTL-BANAL",
        "REF-MW-BANAL",
        "REF-ZDIC-YIBAN",
        "REF-CNRTL-ABANDON",
        "REF-ZDIC-BAN-HANDLE",
        "REF-ZDIC-BAN-TRADITIONAL",
        "REF-CNRTL-ABANDONNER",
        "REF-ZDIC-FANG",
        "REF-MW-ABANDON"
      ]
    },
    "Cognitive": {
      "status": "Interpretive",
      "confidence": "Medium",
      "summary": {
        "en": "Active Association: abandon ↔ 放到一旁 → 旁 páng. CONTROL / DISPOSAL → RELEASE → PUT ASIDE → LEAVE/GIVE UP is an author-proposed cognitive and memory bridge, not an attested chain of sound change or translation of 旁 as abandon. Historical Relation: Not claimed; Active Association Status: Author-proposed / Cognitive association.",
        "zh-Hans": "Active Association：abandon ↔ 放到一旁 → 旁 páng。CONTROL / DISPOSAL → RELEASE → PUT ASIDE → LEAVE/GIVE UP 是作者提出的认知与记忆桥梁，不是已证历史音变链，也不把单字“旁”当作 abandon 的标准译词。Historical Relation: Not claimed；Active Association Status: Author-proposed / Cognitive association。"
      },
      "items": [
        {
          "evidence_id": "COG-ABANDON-001",
          "claim": {
            "en": "Active Association: abandon ↔ 放到一旁 → 旁 páng. CONTROL / DISPOSAL → RELEASE → PUT ASIDE → LEAVE/GIVE UP is an author-proposed cognitive and memory bridge, not an attested chain of sound change or translation of 旁 as abandon. Historical Relation: Not claimed; Active Association Status: Author-proposed / Cognitive association.",
            "zh-Hans": "Active Association：abandon ↔ 放到一旁 → 旁 páng。CONTROL / DISPOSAL → RELEASE → PUT ASIDE → LEAVE/GIVE UP 是作者提出的认知与记忆桥梁，不是已证历史音变链，也不把单字“旁”当作 abandon 的标准译词。Historical Relation: Not claimed；Active Association Status: Author-proposed / Cognitive association。"
          },
          "status": "Interpretive",
          "confidence": "Medium",
          "source_refs": [
            "REF-LANGUAGESBOOK-ABANDON",
            "REF-AUTHOR-ABANDON-20260907"
          ]
        },
        {
          "evidence_id": "COG-DONNER-TONG-001",
          "claim": {
            "en": "donner ↔ 捅: Weak Active Association / Original Author Association, not a primary mapping. French donner means give and descends from Latin donare. The supplied “捅钱 = 给钱” and reading tōng remain Original Author Usage Observation; standard Mandarin dictionaries give 捅 tǒng (poke/pierce, reveal, provoke), not a verified stable give sense. The targeted dictionary/dialect search did not establish that sense; this is a bounded evidence gap, not proof that no speaker uses it. Historical Relation: Not claimed. Donner is not a historical component of abandon.",
            "zh-Hans": "donner ↔ 捅：Weak Active Association / Original Author Association，不作主要映射。法语 donner 意为给，源自拉丁语 donare。用户的“捅钱＝给钱”及 tōng 读法保留为 Original Author Usage Observation；标准普通话词典记“捅”tǒng（戳刺、揭露、招惹），没有核验出稳定的给予义。此次词典／方言检索未能证实该义，不等于证明无人这样使用。Historical Relation: Not claimed。donner 不是 abandon 的历史构词部分。"
          },
          "status": "Interpretive",
          "confidence": "Low",
          "source_refs": [
            "REF-CNRTL-DONNER",
            "REF-ZDIC-TONG",
            "REF-LANGUAGESBOOK-ABANDON",
            "REF-AUTHOR-ABANDON-20260907"
          ]
        }
      ],
      "source_refs": [
        "REF-LANGUAGESBOOK-ABANDON",
        "REF-AUTHOR-ABANDON-20260907",
        "REF-CNRTL-DONNER",
        "REF-ZDIC-TONG"
      ]
    },
    "Speculative": {
      "status": "Rejected",
      "confidence": "High",
      "summary": {
        "en": "Original Author Hypothesis: a.ban.don / a + ban + donner; ban = prohibit, donner = give, therefore prohibit giving = abandon. Independent evaluation: Rejected/Unsupported as historical segmentation. CNRTL regards a ban donner as improbable because that phrase is unattested; the cited doner a abandon examples are later (13th century). Preserve the observation without presenting it as etymology.",
        "zh-Hans": "原始作者假说：a.ban.don / a + ban + donner；ban＝禁止，donner＝给，因此禁止给＝放弃。独立核验：Rejected/Unsupported as historical segmentation（作为历史拆分被否定／缺乏支持）。CNRTL 认为 a ban donner 分析不可信，因为该短语无见证；所引 doner a abandon 例子较晚（13世纪）。保留观察，不作为词源。"
      },
      "items": [
        {
          "evidence_id": "SPEC-ABANDON-001",
          "claim": {
            "en": "Original Author Hypothesis: a.ban.don / a + ban + donner; ban = prohibit, donner = give, therefore prohibit giving = abandon. Independent evaluation: Rejected/Unsupported as historical segmentation. CNRTL regards a ban donner as improbable because that phrase is unattested; the cited doner a abandon examples are later (13th century). Preserve the observation without presenting it as etymology.",
            "zh-Hans": "原始作者假说：a.ban.don / a + ban + donner；ban＝禁止，donner＝给，因此禁止给＝放弃。独立核验：Rejected/Unsupported as historical segmentation（作为历史拆分被否定／缺乏支持）。CNRTL 认为 a ban donner 分析不可信，因为该短语无见证；所引 doner a abandon 例子较晚（13世纪）。保留观察，不作为词源。"
          },
          "status": "Rejected",
          "confidence": "High",
          "source_refs": [
            "REF-MW-ABANDON",
            "REF-CNRTL-ABANDON",
            "REF-CNRTL-ABANDONNER",
            "REF-LANGUAGESBOOK-ABANDON",
            "REF-AUTHOR-ABANDON-20260907"
          ]
        }
      ],
      "source_refs": [
        "REF-MW-ABANDON",
        "REF-CNRTL-ABANDON",
        "REF-CNRTL-ABANDONNER",
        "REF-LANGUAGESBOOK-ABANDON",
        "REF-AUTHOR-ABANDON-20260907"
      ]
    }
  },
  "phonetic_observation": [
    {
      "observation_id": "PHON-ABANDON-FANG-001",
      "claim": {
        "en": "Compare the /b/ after initial /ə/ in English abandon with Mandarin f /f/ in fàng: b ↔ f falls within the proposed b-p-m-f group. This is a medial-to-initial segment comparison, not whole-word homophony; voicing, place/manner, remaining segments and tone differ. Group membership does not prove a sound law or historical relation.",
        "zh-Hans": "比较英语 abandon 起始 /ə/ 后的 /b/ 与普通话 fàng 的 f /f/：b ↔ f 落入候选 b-p-m-f 组。这是词中到词首的片段比较，不是整词同音；清浊、发音部位／方式、其余音段及声调存在差异。同组不证明音变规律或历史关系。"
      },
      "status": "Candidate",
      "limitations": {
        "en": "Whole-word mapping: abandon ↔ 放 fàng. Select 放 for LET GO / RELEASE before comparing sound. CNRTL records release of a rein around 1100 in the French history, and Chinese 放 has an independently documented release sense. This is a scoped historical-semantic bridge, not a claim that 放 alone translates every modern use of abandon.",
        "zh-Hans": "整词映射：abandon ↔ 放 fàng。先按 LET GO／RELEASE 选择“放”，再比较声音。CNRTL 记法语词史中约1100年的松开缰绳义；汉语“放”另有独立的释放义证据。这是限定语义的历时联系，不表示单字“放”可翻译 abandon 的所有现代用法。"
      }
    },
    {
      "observation_id": "PHON-ABANDON-001",
      "claim": {
        "en": "English ban ↔ 甭 béng: Phonetic-Semantic Candidate; semantic strength moderate; overall confidence Low; Historical Relation: Not claimed. The overlap is contextual DON’T / DO NOT / PROHIBIT. English ban often means formal prohibition; 甭 commonly means no need/do not and need not prohibit. English /bæn/ and béng show an author-observed labial onset and loose rhyme resemblance, not homophony: Pinyin b is unaspirated /p/, English b is /b/, final /n/ versus /ŋ/, vowels and tone differ.",
        "zh-Hans": "英语 ban ↔ 甭 béng：Phonetic-Semantic Candidate；语义强度 moderate，整体置信度 Low；Historical Relation: Not claimed。交点限于语境中的 DON’T / DO NOT / PROHIBIT。ban 常表正式禁止，“甭”常表不用／不必／不要，不总是禁止。/bæn/ 与 béng 的双唇起音及宽泛韵部近似仅为作者观察，并非同音：拼音 b 为不送气 /p/，英语 b 为 /b/，韵尾 /n/ 与 /ŋ/、元音和声调有别。"
      },
      "status": "Candidate",
      "limitations": {
        "en": "Renamed in scope from a segment of abandon to independent English ban. Modern resemblance is not regular sound change or cognacy.",
        "zh-Hans": "范围由 abandon 的片段改为独立英语 ban；现代音近不是规律音变或同源。"
      }
    },
    {
      "observation_id": "PHON-BANAL-001",
      "claim": {
        "en": "banal ↔ 般 bān / 一般: Phonetic-Semantic Candidate; semantic strength moderate; overall confidence Low; Historical Relation: Not claimed. The semantic anchor is the word 一般 in its ordinary/common sense, not an assertion that isolated 般 always means ordinary. Modern banal often adds a negative sense of unoriginal or trite that 一般 need not carry. French /ba.nal/ permits a partial ban- versus bān comparison; English pronunciations vary. Unmatched /al/, vowels, voicing and Mandarin tone remain limitations.",
        "zh-Hans": "banal ↔ 般 bān / 一般：Phonetic-Semantic Candidate；语义强度 moderate，整体置信度 Low；Historical Relation: Not claimed。语义依据是“一般”的普通／通常义，不主张单字“般”总有普通义。现代 banal 常含陈腐、无新意的贬义，“一般”未必如此。法语 /ba.nal/ 可与 bān 作局部 ban- 音近观察；英语有多种读法。未对应的 /al/、元音、清浊与汉语声调仍是限制。"
      },
      "status": "Candidate",
      "limitations": {
        "en": "The phonetic comparison selects part of a longer word. Do not silently treat all English pronunciation variants as bān.",
        "zh-Hans": "语音比较选取较长词的局部；不能把英语所有异读默认为 bān。"
      }
    },
    {
      "observation_id": "PHON-BANDON-BAN-001",
      "claim": {
        "en": "b ↔ b → same consonant / within b-p-m-f group is the author’s comparison label. It compares the initial b of bandon with Pinyin b in bàn. Pinyin b represents unaspirated /p/; the label is not proof of identical phonetic realization, homophony, or a historical sound law. A source-specific historical French pronunciation and the remaining consonants, vowels and tone still need independent assessment. Group fit cannot upgrade weak semantics.",
        "zh-Hans": "b ↔ b → same consonant / within b-p-m-f group 是作者的对应标签：比较 bandon 的词首 b 与 bàn 的拼音 b。拼音 b 表示不送气 /p/；此标签不证明实际音值完全相同、同音或历史音变规律。古法语具体时期的读音及其余辅音、元音、汉语声调仍须独立评估。落入预测组不能提升较弱的语义证据。"
      },
      "status": "Candidate",
      "limitations": {
        "en": "Bandon means POWER/AUTHORITY; disposal belongs to the relational phrase à bandon. Modern 办/辦 means handle/manage, prepare or deal with. 说文新附 glosses 辦 as exert effort (致力), not authority. Thus bandon ↔ 办 is a limited control/handling association: Low semantic fit for POWER/AUTHORITY, Medium only for a contextual handling/disposal comparison. It is not an exact root translation. 权柄 is the stronger meaning-first support for authority regardless of its sound.",
        "zh-Hans": "bandon 的核心是 POWER/AUTHORITY；任其处置关系属于 à bandon。现代办／辦为处理、办理、筹备等；《说文新附》释辦为致力，不是权力。因此 bandon ↔ 办仅保留为支配／办理的有限联系：对权力本义语义适配 Low，只有在处理／处置语境比较时为 Medium，不是词根的精确译词。权柄是更合适的权力义支持，其声音不决定选择。"
      }
    }
  ],
  "semantic_structure": {
    "concepts": [
      "POWER/AUTHORITY",
      "DISPOSAL",
      "GIVE OVER",
      "LET GO",
      "GIVE UP"
    ],
    "relation": "POWER / AUTHORITY → DISPOSAL → GIVE OVER → LET GO → GIVE UP",
    "status": "Historical semantic abstraction; independent of consonant-group mapping"
  },
  "related_words": [
    {
      "word": "柄 / 权柄",
      "language": "Old French / Chinese",
      "relationship_type": "Semantic support",
      "family": "No cross-language family claimed",
      "relation_to_entry": {
        "en": "The current 汉典 entry records a power/authority sense for 柄 and usage including 权柄. This supports the Chinese lexical meaning only. The platform is not treated as a critical edition of an ancient dictionary; the cross-language comparison and High semantic-fit grade remain editorial judgments.",
        "zh-Hans": "汉典现行条目记录“柄”的权力义及“权柄”等用法。这仅支持汉语词义；该平台不等同于古代辞书校勘本，跨语言比较及 High 语义适配仍是本项目的编辑判断。"
      },
      "status": "Secondary · High semantic fit · Historical Relation: Not claimed",
      "source_refs": [
        "REF-ZDIC-BING"
      ]
    },
    {
      "word": "bandon ↔ 办",
      "language": "Old French / Chinese",
      "relationship_type": "Root-level semantic candidate",
      "family": "No cross-language family claimed",
      "relation_to_entry": {
        "en": "Bandon means POWER/AUTHORITY; disposal belongs to the relational phrase à bandon. Modern 办/辦 means handle/manage, prepare or deal with. 说文新附 glosses 辦 as exert effort (致力), not authority. Thus bandon ↔ 办 is a limited control/handling association: Low semantic fit for POWER/AUTHORITY, Medium only for a contextual handling/disposal comparison. It is not an exact root translation. 权柄 is the stronger meaning-first support for authority regardless of its sound.",
        "zh-Hans": "bandon 的核心是 POWER/AUTHORITY；任其处置关系属于 à bandon。现代办／辦为处理、办理、筹备等；《说文新附》释辦为致力，不是权力。因此 bandon ↔ 办仅保留为支配／办理的有限联系：对权力本义语义适配 Low，只有在处理／处置语境比较时为 Medium，不是词根的精确译词。权柄是更合适的权力义支持，其声音不决定选择。"
      },
      "status": "Phonetic-Semantic Candidate · Low confidence · Historical Relation: Not claimed",
      "source_refs": [
        "REF-CNRTL-ABANDON",
        "REF-ZDIC-BAN-HANDLE",
        "REF-ZDIC-BING"
      ]
    },
    {
      "word": "abandonment",
      "language": "English",
      "relationship_type": "derivative",
      "family": "abandon family",
      "relation_to_entry": {
        "en": "Documented relation in the stated historical family.",
        "zh-Hans": "在所列历史词族内有文献支持的关系。"
      },
      "status": "Established",
      "source_refs": [
        "REF-MW-ABANDON"
      ]
    },
    {
      "word": "abandon ↔ 放到一旁 → 旁 páng",
      "language": "English / Chinese",
      "relationship_type": "Active Association Principle / Cognitive memory bridge",
      "family": "No cross-language family claimed",
      "relation_to_entry": {
        "en": "Active Association: abandon ↔ 放到一旁 → 旁 páng. CONTROL / DISPOSAL → RELEASE → PUT ASIDE → LEAVE/GIVE UP is an author-proposed cognitive and memory bridge, not an attested chain of sound change or translation of 旁 as abandon. Historical Relation: Not claimed; Active Association Status: Author-proposed / Cognitive association.",
        "zh-Hans": "Active Association：abandon ↔ 放到一旁 → 旁 páng。CONTROL / DISPOSAL → RELEASE → PUT ASIDE → LEAVE/GIVE UP 是作者提出的认知与记忆桥梁，不是已证历史音变链，也不把单字“旁”当作 abandon 的标准译词。Historical Relation: Not claimed；Active Association Status: Author-proposed / Cognitive association。"
      },
      "status": "Author-proposed / Cognitive association",
      "source_refs": [
        "REF-LANGUAGESBOOK-ABANDON",
        "REF-AUTHOR-ABANDON-20260907"
      ]
    },
    {
      "word": "ban ↔ 甭 béng",
      "language": "English / Chinese",
      "relationship_type": "Phonetic-Semantic Candidate",
      "family": "English ban family / independent Chinese 甭",
      "relation_to_entry": {
        "en": "English ban ↔ 甭 béng: Phonetic-Semantic Candidate; semantic strength moderate; overall confidence Low; Historical Relation: Not claimed. The overlap is contextual DON’T / DO NOT / PROHIBIT. English ban often means formal prohibition; 甭 commonly means no need/do not and need not prohibit. English /bæn/ and béng show an author-observed labial onset and loose rhyme resemblance, not homophony: Pinyin b is unaspirated /p/, English b is /b/, final /n/ versus /ŋ/, vowels and tone differ.",
        "zh-Hans": "英语 ban ↔ 甭 béng：Phonetic-Semantic Candidate；语义强度 moderate，整体置信度 Low；Historical Relation: Not claimed。交点限于语境中的 DON’T / DO NOT / PROHIBIT。ban 常表正式禁止，“甭”常表不用／不必／不要，不总是禁止。/bæn/ 与 béng 的双唇起音及宽泛韵部近似仅为作者观察，并非同音：拼音 b 为不送气 /p/，英语 b 为 /b/，韵尾 /n/ 与 /ŋ/、元音和声调有别。"
      },
      "status": "Candidate · semantic moderate · Low confidence · Historical Relation: Not claimed",
      "source_refs": [
        "REF-MW-BAN",
        "REF-ACADEMIE-BAN",
        "REF-ZDIC-BENG",
        "REF-LANGUAGESBOOK-ABANDON",
        "REF-AUTHOR-ABANDON-20260907"
      ]
    },
    {
      "word": "French ban",
      "language": "French",
      "relationship_type": "Related lexical correction",
      "family": "Old Low Franconian command / jurisdiction background",
      "relation_to_entry": {
        "en": "English ban (verb) continues Old English bannan, a Germanic proclamation/command verb; Middle English prohibitive senses reflect Norse influence, with later French/Latin influence. The English noun partly derives from the verb and partly from Anglo-French. French ban /bɑ̃/ is a masculine noun of Old Low Franconian origin: public proclamation, feudal summons/jurisdiction, banns, and exclusion in expressions such as mettre au ban. It is not the ordinary French verb “to prohibit” (interdire); the old note’s French ban v. 禁止 is corrected. This distinction does not cancel the independently proposed English ban ↔ 甭 candidate.",
        "zh-Hans": "英语动词 ban 承自古英语 bannan，属于日耳曼语宣告／命令词族；中古英语禁止等义受古诺斯语影响，后又受法语／拉丁语影响。英语名词部分来自动词，部分借自盎格鲁法语。法语 ban /bɑ̃/ 为阳性名词，源于古低地法兰克语，涉及公告、封建征召／管辖、婚姻公告及 mettre au ban 等排斥用语；它不是通常表示“禁止”的法语动词（interdire）。旧笔记“法语 ban v. 禁止”已纠正，这不取消独立的英语 ban ↔ 甭 候选。"
      },
      "status": "Lexical history supported; not French verb 禁止",
      "source_refs": [
        "REF-MW-BAN",
        "REF-ACADEMIE-BAN",
        "REF-ZDIC-BENG",
        "REF-LANGUAGESBOOK-ABANDON",
        "REF-AUTHOR-ABANDON-20260907"
      ]
    },
    {
      "word": "banal ↔ 般 bān / 一般",
      "language": "French / English / Chinese",
      "relationship_type": "Phonetic-Semantic Candidate",
      "family": "European feudal-ban family; no Chinese cognacy claimed",
      "relation_to_entry": {
        "en": "banal ↔ 般 bān / 一般: Phonetic-Semantic Candidate; semantic strength moderate; overall confidence Low; Historical Relation: Not claimed. The semantic anchor is the word 一般 in its ordinary/common sense, not an assertion that isolated 般 always means ordinary. Modern banal often adds a negative sense of unoriginal or trite that 一般 need not carry. French /ba.nal/ permits a partial ban- versus bān comparison; English pronunciations vary. Unmatched /al/, vowels, voicing and Mandarin tone remain limitations.",
        "zh-Hans": "banal ↔ 般 bān / 一般：Phonetic-Semantic Candidate；语义强度 moderate，整体置信度 Low；Historical Relation: Not claimed。语义依据是“一般”的普通／通常义，不主张单字“般”总有普通义。现代 banal 常含陈腐、无新意的贬义，“一般”未必如此。法语 /ba.nal/ 可与 bān 作局部 ban- 音近观察；英语有多种读法。未对应的 /al/、元音、清浊与汉语声调仍是限制。"
      },
      "status": "Candidate · semantic moderate · Low confidence · Historical Relation: Not claimed",
      "source_refs": [
        "REF-CNRTL-BANAL",
        "REF-MW-BANAL",
        "REF-ZDIC-YIBAN",
        "REF-LANGUAGESBOOK-ABANDON",
        "REF-AUTHOR-ABANDON-20260907"
      ]
    },
    {
      "word": "donner ↔ 捅 (author tōng; standard tǒng)",
      "language": "French / Chinese",
      "relationship_type": "Weak Active Association / Original Author Association",
      "family": "Latin donare / no Chinese historical relation claimed",
      "relation_to_entry": {
        "en": "donner ↔ 捅: Weak Active Association / Original Author Association, not a primary mapping. French donner means give and descends from Latin donare. The supplied “捅钱 = 给钱” and reading tōng remain Original Author Usage Observation; standard Mandarin dictionaries give 捅 tǒng (poke/pierce, reveal, provoke), not a verified stable give sense. The targeted dictionary/dialect search did not establish that sense; this is a bounded evidence gap, not proof that no speaker uses it. Historical Relation: Not claimed. Donner is not a historical component of abandon.",
        "zh-Hans": "donner ↔ 捅：Weak Active Association / Original Author Association，不作主要映射。法语 donner 意为给，源自拉丁语 donare。用户的“捅钱＝给钱”及 tōng 读法保留为 Original Author Usage Observation；标准普通话词典记“捅”tǒng（戳刺、揭露、招惹），没有核验出稳定的给予义。此次词典／方言检索未能证实该义，不等于证明无人这样使用。Historical Relation: Not claimed。donner 不是 abandon 的历史构词部分。"
      },
      "status": "Weak · Author-proposed · Historical Relation: Not claimed",
      "source_refs": [
        "REF-CNRTL-DONNER",
        "REF-ZDIC-TONG",
        "REF-LANGUAGESBOOK-ABANDON",
        "REF-AUTHOR-ABANDON-20260907"
      ]
    },
    {
      "word": "band / bande",
      "language": "English / French",
      "relationship_type": "Related lexical note",
      "family": "Sense-specific histories; no automatic merger with abandon",
      "relation_to_entry": {
        "en": "Related lexical note only: English band “group” comes through Middle French bande and Old Occitan banda, associated with a Germanic sign/banner history; band “strip/binding” has a distinct history. French bande is a noun with strip and group senses, not simply the verb “bandage.” CNRTL notes uncertainty in the route of the group sense. Spelling alone does not merge band/bande with abandon. Possible deeper sign/command interactions mentioned by etymologists do not establish the author’s segmentation or independent experimental evidence.",
        "zh-Hans": "仅作关联词汇笔记：英语 band“一群”经中古法语 bande、古奥克语 banda，与日耳曼语标志／旗帜背景有关；band“条带／束缚”有另一词史。法语 bande 是名词，含条带与群体等义，不能只写成动词“包扎”。CNRTL 保留群体义传播路线的不确定性。不能因拼写相似并入 abandon 词族；词源学者提到的更深层标志／命令关系，不证实作者拆词，也不自动形成独立实验数据。"
      },
      "status": "Lexical note only",
      "source_refs": [
        "REF-MW-BAND",
        "REF-CNRTL-BANDE"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "semantic_associations": [
    {
      "association_id": "ASSOC-ABANDON-001",
      "relation": "abandon ↔ 放到一旁 → 旁 páng; CONTROL / DISPOSAL → RELEASE → PUT ASIDE → LEAVE/GIVE UP",
      "status": "Author-proposed / Cognitive association",
      "is_etymological": false
    },
    {
      "association_id": "ASSOC-DONNER-TONG-001",
      "relation": "donner ↔ 捅; 捅钱 = 给钱 is Original Author Usage Observation",
      "status": "Weak / Original Author Association",
      "is_etymological": false
    }
  ],
  "hypotheses": [
    {
      "hypothesis_id": "HYP-ABANDON-FANG-001",
      "type": "Whole-word Phonetic-Semantic Candidate",
      "claim": {
        "en": "Whole-word mapping: abandon ↔ 放 fàng. Select 放 for LET GO / RELEASE before comparing sound. CNRTL records release of a rein around 1100 in the French history, and Chinese 放 has an independently documented release sense. This is a scoped historical-semantic bridge, not a claim that 放 alone translates every modern use of abandon.",
        "zh-Hans": "整词映射：abandon ↔ 放 fàng。先按 LET GO／RELEASE 选择“放”，再比较声音。CNRTL 记法语词史中约1100年的松开缰绳义；汉语“放”另有独立的释放义证据。这是限定语义的历时联系，不表示单字“放”可翻译 abandon 的所有现代用法。"
      },
      "status": "Candidate",
      "confidence": "Low",
      "historical_relation_status": "Not claimed",
      "supporting_cases": [
        "Scoped LET GO/RELEASE semantic bridge; not experimental confirmation"
      ],
      "counterexamples": [
        "放 alone does not cover all modern abandon senses",
        "Medial /b/ versus initial /f/; unmatched remaining segments and tone"
      ],
      "testability": {
        "en": "Meaning first, consonant second. Predeclare the compared positions and meanings, collect positive/negative cases and matched controls, and deduplicate etymological families. Whole-word and root observations within this entry are not independent historical cases.",
        "zh-Hans": "先定语义，再验辅音。预先声明比较位置与词义，收集正反例和匹配控制，按词源家族去重。本词条的整词与词根观察不是独立历史案例。"
      },
      "experiment_link": null,
      "source_refs": [
        "REF-CNRTL-ABANDONNER",
        "REF-ZDIC-FANG",
        "REF-MW-ABANDON"
      ]
    },
    {
      "hypothesis_id": "HYP-BPMF-CONSONANT-GROUP",
      "type": "Cross-language consonant correspondence hypothesis / case link",
      "claim": {
        "en": "Semantic Path studies how one word’s historical meanings develop. Consonant Group Mapping compares an English/French historical word or root with the pronunciation of a semantically selected Chinese candidate. These are independent analyses. The b-p-m-f, d-t-n-l, g-k-h and z-c-s groups predict cross-language sound correspondences, not membership of every Chinese word in one path.",
        "zh-Hans": "Semantic Path 研究一个词的历史语义怎样发展。Consonant Group Mapping 比较英／法历史词或词根与按语义选出的汉语候选词读音。两者独立；b-p-m-f、d-t-n-l、g-k-h、z-c-s 等组预测跨语言声音对应，不要求汉语路径中的每个字属于同组。"
      },
      "status": "Candidate",
      "confidence": "Low",
      "supporting_cases": [
        "bandon ↔ 办: limited candidate, not validated support"
      ],
      "counterexamples": [
        "POWER/AUTHORITY differs from handling",
        "Pinyin b is /p/, not proof of identical phonetic realization",
        "Remaining consonants, vowels and tone are unmatched",
        "Known candidate selection is not a blinded evaluation"
      ],
      "testability": {
        "en": "Identify the historical English/French word or root. Verify its historical semantic meaning and phrase boundaries. Select the best Chinese character/word by meaning independently of sound; retain alternatives. Only then compare the English/French consonant with the Chinese pronunciation. Check the predicted b-p-m-f / d-t-n-l / g-k-h / z-c-s correspondence without requiring a same-group Chinese chain. Score semantics, consonant-group fit, phonetic evidence and historical relation independently. Test later with large samples, counterexamples, matched/random controls and etymological-family deduplication; preregister segments, sources and exclusions. abash ↔ 怕 pà (medial b ↔ p) and bash ↔ 拍 pāi (initial b ↔ p) are two other separately identified Candidate observations. Sharing b-p-m-f does not make them prove each other or bandon ↔ 办. Statistical independence requires etymological-family review; count related derivatives once.",
        "zh-Hans": "① 确定英／法历史词或词根。 ② 核验历史语义与短语边界。 ③ 先按语义独立选择最合适的汉字／词，保留替代候选。 ④ 再比较英／法辅音与汉语读音。 ⑤ 检查是否落入预测辅音组，不要求汉语路径全链同组。 ⑥ 独立评分：语义、辅音组适配、音值证据与历史关系。 ⑦ 将来以大样本、反例、匹配／随机控制及词源家族去重实验验证；预注册片段、来源与排除条件。 abash ↔ 怕 pà（词中 b ↔ p）与 bash ↔ 拍 pāi（词首 b ↔ p）是另外两个分别记录的 Candidate 观察。共享 b-p-m-f 不使它们互相证明，也不证明 bandon ↔ 办；统计独立性仍需词源家族核验，同源派生须去重。"
      },
      "experiment_link": "EXP-BANDON-BAN-CORRESPONDENCE-PLAN",
      "source_refs": [
        "REF-CNRTL-ABANDON",
        "REF-ZDIC-BAN-HANDLE",
        "REF-ZDIC-BAN-TRADITIONAL"
      ],
      "historical_relation_status": "Not claimed"
    },
    {
      "hypothesis_id": "HYP-BANDON-BAN-001",
      "type": "Phonetic-Semantic Candidate",
      "claim": {
        "en": "Bandon means POWER/AUTHORITY; disposal belongs to the relational phrase à bandon. Modern 办/辦 means handle/manage, prepare or deal with. 说文新附 glosses 辦 as exert effort (致力), not authority. Thus bandon ↔ 办 is a limited control/handling association: Low semantic fit for POWER/AUTHORITY, Medium only for a contextual handling/disposal comparison. It is not an exact root translation. 权柄 is the stronger meaning-first support for authority regardless of its sound.",
        "zh-Hans": "bandon 的核心是 POWER/AUTHORITY；任其处置关系属于 à bandon。现代办／辦为处理、办理、筹备等；《说文新附》释辦为致力，不是权力。因此 bandon ↔ 办仅保留为支配／办理的有限联系：对权力本义语义适配 Low，只有在处理／处置语境比较时为 Medium，不是词根的精确译词。权柄是更合适的权力义支持，其声音不决定选择。"
      },
      "status": "Candidate",
      "confidence": "Low",
      "supporting_cases": [
        "bandon ↔ 办: limited candidate, not validated support"
      ],
      "counterexamples": [
        "POWER/AUTHORITY differs from handling",
        "Pinyin b is /p/, not proof of identical phonetic realization",
        "Remaining consonants, vowels and tone are unmatched",
        "Known candidate selection is not a blinded evaluation"
      ],
      "testability": {
        "en": "Identify the historical English/French word or root. Verify its historical semantic meaning and phrase boundaries. Select the best Chinese character/word by meaning independently of sound; retain alternatives. Only then compare the English/French consonant with the Chinese pronunciation. Check the predicted b-p-m-f / d-t-n-l / g-k-h / z-c-s correspondence without requiring a same-group Chinese chain. Score semantics, consonant-group fit, phonetic evidence and historical relation independently. Test later with large samples, counterexamples, matched/random controls and etymological-family deduplication; preregister segments, sources and exclusions. abash ↔ 怕 pà (medial b ↔ p) and bash ↔ 拍 pāi (initial b ↔ p) are two other separately identified Candidate observations. Sharing b-p-m-f does not make them prove each other or bandon ↔ 办. Statistical independence requires etymological-family review; count related derivatives once.",
        "zh-Hans": "① 确定英／法历史词或词根。 ② 核验历史语义与短语边界。 ③ 先按语义独立选择最合适的汉字／词，保留替代候选。 ④ 再比较英／法辅音与汉语读音。 ⑤ 检查是否落入预测辅音组，不要求汉语路径全链同组。 ⑥ 独立评分：语义、辅音组适配、音值证据与历史关系。 ⑦ 将来以大样本、反例、匹配／随机控制及词源家族去重实验验证；预注册片段、来源与排除条件。 abash ↔ 怕 pà（词中 b ↔ p）与 bash ↔ 拍 pāi（词首 b ↔ p）是另外两个分别记录的 Candidate 观察。共享 b-p-m-f 不使它们互相证明，也不证明 bandon ↔ 办；统计独立性仍需词源家族核验，同源派生须去重。"
      },
      "experiment_link": "EXP-BANDON-BAN-CORRESPONDENCE-PLAN",
      "source_refs": [
        "REF-CNRTL-ABANDON",
        "REF-ZDIC-BAN-HANDLE",
        "REF-ZDIC-BAN-TRADITIONAL"
      ],
      "historical_relation_status": "Not claimed"
    },
    {
      "hypothesis_id": "UNI-LEGACY-ABANDON-001",
      "type": "Original Author Hypothesis / rejected historical segmentation",
      "claim": {
        "en": "Original Author Hypothesis: a.ban.don / a + ban + donner; ban = prohibit, donner = give, therefore prohibit giving = abandon. Independent evaluation: Rejected/Unsupported as historical segmentation. CNRTL regards a ban donner as improbable because that phrase is unattested; the cited doner a abandon examples are later (13th century). Preserve the observation without presenting it as etymology.",
        "zh-Hans": "原始作者假说：a.ban.don / a + ban + donner；ban＝禁止，donner＝给，因此禁止给＝放弃。独立核验：Rejected/Unsupported as historical segmentation（作为历史拆分被否定／缺乏支持）。CNRTL 认为 a ban donner 分析不可信，因为该短语无见证；所引 doner a abandon 例子较晚（13世纪）。保留观察，不作为词源。"
      },
      "status": "Rejected",
      "confidence": "High",
      "supporting_cases": [],
      "counterexamples": [
        "CNRTL: unattested a ban donner; attested historical structure differs."
      ],
      "testability": {
        "en": "Reopen the historical analysis only with earlier attested forms supporting the proposed segmentation; its rejection does not determine other candidate statuses.",
        "zh-Hans": "仅在有更早见证形式支持该拆分时重开历史分析；它的否定不决定其他候选状态。"
      },
      "experiment_link": null,
      "source_refs": [
        "REF-MW-ABANDON",
        "REF-CNRTL-ABANDON",
        "REF-CNRTL-ABANDONNER",
        "REF-LANGUAGESBOOK-ABANDON",
        "REF-AUTHOR-ABANDON-20260907"
      ],
      "historical_relation_status": "Rejected"
    },
    {
      "hypothesis_id": "HYP-BAN-BENG-001",
      "type": "Phonetic-Semantic Candidate",
      "claim": {
        "en": "English ban ↔ 甭 béng: Phonetic-Semantic Candidate; semantic strength moderate; overall confidence Low; Historical Relation: Not claimed. The overlap is contextual DON’T / DO NOT / PROHIBIT. English ban often means formal prohibition; 甭 commonly means no need/do not and need not prohibit. English /bæn/ and béng show an author-observed labial onset and loose rhyme resemblance, not homophony: Pinyin b is unaspirated /p/, English b is /b/, final /n/ versus /ŋ/, vowels and tone differ.",
        "zh-Hans": "英语 ban ↔ 甭 béng：Phonetic-Semantic Candidate；语义强度 moderate，整体置信度 Low；Historical Relation: Not claimed。交点限于语境中的 DON’T / DO NOT / PROHIBIT。ban 常表正式禁止，“甭”常表不用／不必／不要，不总是禁止。/bæn/ 与 béng 的双唇起音及宽泛韵部近似仅为作者观察，并非同音：拼音 b 为不送气 /p/，英语 b 为 /b/，韵尾 /n/ 与 /ŋ/、元音和声调有别。"
      },
      "status": "Candidate",
      "confidence": "Low",
      "supporting_cases": [
        "Contextual DON’T / DO NOT / PROHIBIT"
      ],
      "counterexamples": [
        "Different lexical/grammatical scope; /n/ vs /ŋ/; voicing/vowels/tone differ."
      ],
      "testability": {
        "en": "Evaluate semantics and phonetics independently with negative cases and randomized controls; deduplicate etymological families. Publication does not validate this relation.",
        "zh-Hans": "分别核验语义和声音，保留反例与随机对照，按词源家族去重；词条发表不验证该关系。"
      },
      "experiment_link": null,
      "source_refs": [
        "REF-MW-BAN",
        "REF-ACADEMIE-BAN",
        "REF-ZDIC-BENG",
        "REF-LANGUAGESBOOK-ABANDON",
        "REF-AUTHOR-ABANDON-20260907"
      ],
      "historical_relation_status": "Not claimed",
      "semantic_strength": "moderate"
    },
    {
      "hypothesis_id": "HYP-BANAL-BAN-001",
      "type": "Phonetic-Semantic Candidate",
      "claim": {
        "en": "banal ↔ 般 bān / 一般: Phonetic-Semantic Candidate; semantic strength moderate; overall confidence Low; Historical Relation: Not claimed. The semantic anchor is the word 一般 in its ordinary/common sense, not an assertion that isolated 般 always means ordinary. Modern banal often adds a negative sense of unoriginal or trite that 一般 need not carry. French /ba.nal/ permits a partial ban- versus bān comparison; English pronunciations vary. Unmatched /al/, vowels, voicing and Mandarin tone remain limitations.",
        "zh-Hans": "banal ↔ 般 bān / 一般：Phonetic-Semantic Candidate；语义强度 moderate，整体置信度 Low；Historical Relation: Not claimed。语义依据是“一般”的普通／通常义，不主张单字“般”总有普通义。现代 banal 常含陈腐、无新意的贬义，“一般”未必如此。法语 /ba.nal/ 可与 bān 作局部 ban- 音近观察；英语有多种读法。未对应的 /al/、元音、清浊与汉语声调仍是限制。"
      },
      "status": "Candidate",
      "confidence": "Low",
      "supporting_cases": [
        "Ordinary/common sense of 一般"
      ],
      "counterexamples": [
        "banal often means trite; isolated 般 is not equivalent; partial phonetic match only."
      ],
      "testability": {
        "en": "Evaluate semantics and phonetics independently with negative cases and randomized controls; deduplicate etymological families. Publication does not validate this relation.",
        "zh-Hans": "分别核验语义和声音，保留反例与随机对照，按词源家族去重；词条发表不验证该关系。"
      },
      "experiment_link": null,
      "source_refs": [
        "REF-CNRTL-BANAL",
        "REF-MW-BANAL",
        "REF-ZDIC-YIBAN",
        "REF-LANGUAGESBOOK-ABANDON",
        "REF-AUTHOR-ABANDON-20260907"
      ],
      "historical_relation_status": "Not claimed",
      "semantic_strength": "moderate"
    }
  ],
  "counterevidence": [
    {
      "counterevidence_id": "COUNTER-ABANDON-001",
      "statement": {
        "en": "Original Author Hypothesis: a.ban.don / a + ban + donner; ban = prohibit, donner = give, therefore prohibit giving = abandon. Independent evaluation: Rejected/Unsupported as historical segmentation. CNRTL regards a ban donner as improbable because that phrase is unattested; the cited doner a abandon examples are later (13th century). Preserve the observation without presenting it as etymology.",
        "zh-Hans": "原始作者假说：a.ban.don / a + ban + donner；ban＝禁止，donner＝给，因此禁止给＝放弃。独立核验：Rejected/Unsupported as historical segmentation（作为历史拆分被否定／缺乏支持）。CNRTL 认为 a ban donner 分析不可信，因为该短语无见证；所引 doner a abandon 例子较晚（13世纪）。保留观察，不作为词源。"
      },
      "confidence": "High",
      "source_refs": [
        "REF-MW-ABANDON",
        "REF-CNRTL-ABANDON",
        "REF-CNRTL-ABANDONNER",
        "REF-LANGUAGESBOOK-ABANDON",
        "REF-AUTHOR-ABANDON-20260907"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "experiments": [
    {
      "experiment_id": "EXP-BANDON-BAN-CORRESPONDENCE-PLAN",
      "title": {
        "en": "Meaning-first cross-language consonant correspondence study",
        "zh-Hans": "先定语义的跨语言辅音对应研究"
      },
      "status": "Planned / Not run",
      "tested_hypotheses": [
        "HYP-BANDON-BAN-001",
        "HYP-BPMF-CONSONANT-GROUP"
      ],
      "result": {
        "en": "No results. Large-sample positive/negative and control design pending; no mutual proof from shared group membership.",
        "zh-Hans": "无结果。大样本正反例及控制设计待实施；共享辅音组不互相证明。"
      },
      "path": "words/abandon.html#experiment",
      "source_refs": []
    }
  ],
  "literary_layer": {
    "status": "Source material / Active Association",
    "is_historical_evidence": false,
    "proposition": {
      "en": "Active Association: abandon ↔ 放到一旁 → 旁 páng. CONTROL / DISPOSAL → RELEASE → PUT ASIDE → LEAVE/GIVE UP is an author-proposed cognitive and memory bridge, not an attested chain of sound change or translation of 旁 as abandon. Historical Relation: Not claimed; Active Association Status: Author-proposed / Cognitive association.",
      "zh-Hans": "Active Association：abandon ↔ 放到一旁 → 旁 páng。CONTROL / DISPOSAL → RELEASE → PUT ASIDE → LEAVE/GIVE UP 是作者提出的认知与记忆桥梁，不是已证历史音变链，也不把单字“旁”当作 abandon 的标准译词。Historical Relation: Not claimed；Active Association Status: Author-proposed / Cognitive association。"
    },
    "essay_prose": [],
    "poem_lyrics": [],
    "translations": [],
    "archival_manuscript_media": [],
    "evidence_boundary": {
      "en": "The author’s put-aside image may be explored freely; it is neither historical nor experimental evidence. Earlier 甭/GIVE UP editorial mnemonic retained only in revision history.",
      "zh-Hans": "作者“放到一旁”的意象可自由展开，不作历史或实验依据。早先“甭／GIVE UP”编辑记忆法仅在修订档案中保留。"
    }
  },
  "media": [],
  "references": [
    {
      "reference_id": "REF-LANGUAGESBOOK-ABANDON",
      "title": "languagesbook.com legacy entry: abandon，放弃。甭 beng。ban 与甭同音",
      "type": "legacy author publication",
      "url": "https://languagesbook.com/glossary/abandon/",
      "path": null,
      "provenance": "author-published legacy website; imported 2026-09-01; original observation preserved independently from evaluation"
    },
    {
      "reference_id": "REF-MW-ABANDON",
      "title": "Merriam-Webster Dictionary: abandon",
      "type": "dictionary",
      "url": "https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/abandon",
      "path": null,
      "provenance": "External lexicographic reference; rechecked 2026-09-07"
    },
    {
      "reference_id": "REF-CNRTL-ABANDON",
      "title": "CNRTL/TLFi: abandon, etymology and history",
      "type": "dictionary",
      "url": "https://www.cnrtl.fr/definition/abandon",
      "path": null,
      "provenance": "External lexicographic source; checked 2026-09-07. Supports the scoped lexical/history claim, not the author’s cross-language relation."
    },
    {
      "reference_id": "REF-CNRTL-ABANDONNER",
      "title": "CNRTL/TLFi: abandonner, etymology",
      "type": "dictionary",
      "url": "https://www.cnrtl.fr/etymologie/abandonner",
      "path": null,
      "provenance": "External lexicographic source; checked 2026-09-07. Supports the scoped lexical/history claim, not the author’s cross-language relation."
    },
    {
      "reference_id": "REF-CAMBRIDGE-ABANDON",
      "title": "Cambridge English–Chinese Dictionary: abandon",
      "type": "dictionary",
      "url": "https://dictionary.cambridge.org/zhs/词典/英语-汉语-简体/abandon",
      "path": null,
      "provenance": "External lexicographic source; checked 2026-09-07. Supports the scoped lexical/history claim, not the author’s cross-language relation."
    },
    {
      "reference_id": "REF-MW-BAN",
      "title": "Merriam-Webster: ban",
      "type": "dictionary",
      "url": "https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ban",
      "path": null,
      "provenance": "External lexicographic source; checked 2026-09-07. Supports the scoped lexical/history claim, not the author’s cross-language relation."
    },
    {
      "reference_id": "REF-ACADEMIE-BAN",
      "title": "Académie française, 9th edition: ban",
      "type": "dictionary",
      "url": "https://www.cnrtl.fr/definition/academie9/ban",
      "path": null,
      "provenance": "External lexicographic source; checked 2026-09-07. Supports the scoped lexical/history claim, not the author’s cross-language relation."
    },
    {
      "reference_id": "REF-CNRTL-BANAL",
      "title": "CNRTL/TLFi: banal, etymology",
      "type": "dictionary",
      "url": "https://www.cnrtl.fr/etymologie/banal",
      "path": null,
      "provenance": "External lexicographic source; checked 2026-09-07. Supports the scoped lexical/history claim, not the author’s cross-language relation."
    },
    {
      "reference_id": "REF-MW-BANAL",
      "title": "Merriam-Webster: banal",
      "type": "dictionary",
      "url": "https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/banal",
      "path": null,
      "provenance": "External lexicographic source; checked 2026-09-07. Supports the scoped lexical/history claim, not the author’s cross-language relation."
    },
    {
      "reference_id": "REF-ZDIC-YIBAN",
      "title": "汉典：一般",
      "type": "dictionary",
      "url": "https://zdic.net/hans/一般",
      "path": null,
      "provenance": "External lexicographic source; checked 2026-09-07. Supports the scoped lexical/history claim, not the author’s cross-language relation. Access/aggregation platform: 汉典 (Zdic). Original work and edition must be identified for each historical quotation; platform compilation is not an original dictionary edition."
    },
    {
      "reference_id": "REF-CNRTL-DONNER",
      "title": "CNRTL/TLFi: donner",
      "type": "dictionary",
      "url": "https://cnrtl.fr/definition/donner",
      "path": null,
      "provenance": "External lexicographic source; checked 2026-09-07. Supports the scoped lexical/history claim, not the author’s cross-language relation."
    },
    {
      "reference_id": "REF-MW-BAND",
      "title": "Merriam-Webster: band, separate noun histories",
      "type": "dictionary",
      "url": "https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/band",
      "path": null,
      "provenance": "External lexicographic source; checked 2026-09-07. Supports the scoped lexical/history claim, not the author’s cross-language relation."
    },
    {
      "reference_id": "REF-CNRTL-BANDE",
      "title": "CNRTL/TLFi: bande, group sense",
      "type": "dictionary",
      "url": "https://www.cnrtl.fr/etymologie/bande//1",
      "path": null,
      "provenance": "External lexicographic source; checked 2026-09-07. Supports the scoped lexical/history claim, not the author’s cross-language relation."
    },
    {
      "reference_id": "REF-AUTHOR-ABANDON-20260907",
      "title": "Jinkai Liu: ABANDON full original note and editorial instructions",
      "type": "Original Author Hypothesis",
      "url": null,
      "path": "docs/abandon-semantic-network-v1.md",
      "provenance": "Author-supplied conversation text, 2026-09-07; original historical claims independently evaluated."
    },
    {
      "reference_id": "REF-ZDIC-BAN-HANDLE",
      "title": "汉典：办",
      "type": "dictionary",
      "url": "https://www.zdic.net/hans/办",
      "path": null,
      "provenance": "Checked 2026-09-07. Scoped Chinese lexical evidence; historical examples are dictionary-attributed, not manuscript collation. No cross-language origin or sound law supported. Access/aggregation platform: 汉典 (Zdic). Original work and edition must be identified for each historical quotation; platform compilation is not an original dictionary edition."
    },
    {
      "reference_id": "REF-ZDIC-FANG",
      "title": "汉典：放",
      "type": "dictionary",
      "url": "https://www.zdic.net/hans/放",
      "path": null,
      "provenance": "Checked 2026-09-07. Scoped Chinese lexical evidence; historical examples are dictionary-attributed, not manuscript collation. No cross-language origin or sound law supported. Access/aggregation platform: 汉典 (Zdic). Original work and edition must be identified for each historical quotation; platform compilation is not an original dictionary edition."
    },
    {
      "reference_id": "REF-ZDIC-BA",
      "title": "汉典：罢",
      "type": "dictionary",
      "url": "https://www.zdic.net/hans/罢",
      "path": null,
      "provenance": "Checked 2026-09-07. Scoped Chinese lexical evidence; historical examples are dictionary-attributed, not manuscript collation. No cross-language origin or sound law supported. Access/aggregation platform: 汉典 (Zdic). Original work and edition must be identified for each historical quotation; platform compilation is not an original dictionary edition."
    },
    {
      "reference_id": "REF-ZDIC-PAO",
      "title": "汉典：抛",
      "type": "dictionary",
      "url": "https://www.zdic.net/hans/抛",
      "path": null,
      "provenance": "Checked 2026-09-07. Scoped Chinese lexical evidence; historical examples are dictionary-attributed, not manuscript collation. No cross-language origin or sound law supported. Access/aggregation platform: 汉典 (Zdic). Original work and edition must be identified for each historical quotation; platform compilation is not an original dictionary edition."
    },
    {
      "reference_id": "REF-ZDIC-CHUZHI",
      "title": "汉典：处置",
      "type": "dictionary",
      "url": "https://www.zdic.net/hans/处置",
      "path": null,
      "provenance": "Checked 2026-09-07. Scoped Chinese lexical evidence; historical examples are dictionary-attributed, not manuscript collation. No cross-language origin or sound law supported. Access/aggregation platform: 汉典 (Zdic). Original work and edition must be identified for each historical quotation; platform compilation is not an original dictionary edition."
    },
    {
      "reference_id": "REF-ZDIC-FU",
      "title": "汉典：付",
      "type": "dictionary",
      "url": "https://www.zdic.net/hans/付",
      "path": null,
      "provenance": "Checked 2026-09-07. Scoped Chinese lexical evidence; historical examples are dictionary-attributed, not manuscript collation. No cross-language origin or sound law supported. Access/aggregation platform: 汉典 (Zdic). Original work and edition must be identified for each historical quotation; platform compilation is not an original dictionary edition."
    },
    {
      "reference_id": "REF-ZDIC-QI",
      "title": "汉典：弃",
      "type": "dictionary",
      "url": "https://www.zdic.net/hans/弃",
      "path": null,
      "provenance": "Checked 2026-09-07. Scoped Chinese lexical evidence; historical examples are dictionary-attributed, not manuscript collation. No cross-language origin or sound law supported. Access/aggregation platform: 汉典 (Zdic). Original work and edition must be identified for each historical quotation; platform compilation is not an original dictionary edition."
    },
    {
      "reference_id": "REF-ZDIC-BAN-TRADITIONAL",
      "title": "《说文解字》新附：辦；汉典：现代义项",
      "type": "dictionary",
      "url": "https://www.zdic.net/hans/辦",
      "path": null,
      "provenance": "Checked 2026-09-07. Supports Chinese lexical senses; does not establish French-Chinese history or exact phonetic identity. Access/aggregation platform: 汉典 (Zdic). Original work and edition must be identified for each historical quotation; platform compilation is not an original dictionary edition. Original work: 《说文解字》新附, 辦; accessed through the platform transcription, not a directly collated edition; edition unspecified."
    },
    {
      "reference_id": "REF-ZDIC-BENG",
      "title": "汉典：甭",
      "type": "mainland digital lexicographic platform",
      "url": "https://www.zdic.net/hans/甭",
      "path": null,
      "provenance": "汉典现行条目；用于甭的现代不用、不必等义；不把它扩大为所有正式禁止义；accessed 2026-09-08. 汉典为大陆数字辞书平台，不冒充纸本辞书或所转录古籍的校勘本；古籍书证若未直接核对具体整理本，只按平台转录层级使用。"
    },
    {
      "reference_id": "REF-ZDIC-TONG",
      "title": "汉典：捅",
      "type": "mainland digital lexicographic platform",
      "url": "https://www.zdic.net/hans/捅",
      "path": null,
      "provenance": "汉典现行条目；用于普通话读音与戳刺、揭露、招惹等现代义；未核验出稳定的‘给’义；accessed 2026-09-08. 汉典为大陆数字辞书平台，不冒充纸本辞书或所转录古籍的校勘本；古籍书证若未直接核对具体整理本，只按平台转录层级使用。"
    },
    {
      "reference_id": "REF-ZDIC-BING",
      "title": "汉典：柄",
      "type": "mainland digital lexicographic platform",
      "url": "https://www.zdic.net/hans/柄",
      "path": null,
      "provenance": "汉典现行条目；用于柄的现代权力义、权柄用法与平台所列历史材料；不支持跨语言关系；accessed 2026-09-08. 汉典为大陆数字辞书平台，不冒充纸本辞书或所转录古籍的校勘本；古籍书证若未直接核对具体整理本，只按平台转录层级使用。"
    }
  ],
  "author": "Jinkai Liu",
  "version": "ABANDON Whole-Word and Root Mapping v1.0 / Schema v1.0",
  "dates": {
    "created": null,
    "modified": "2026-09-07",
    "published": "2026-09-07"
  },
  "editorial_notes": [
    {
      "en": "Legacy Batch 001 disposition: Candidate; priority 90.7/100 is editorial triage only.",
      "zh-Hans": "旧站 Batch 001 归类：Candidate；优先分 90.7/100 仅用于编辑分流。"
    },
    {
      "en": "Modern English ban and French donner should not be retrofitted as the components of abandon.",
      "zh-Hans": "不能用现代英语 ban 与法语 donner 反向拼装 abandon 的词史。"
    },
    {
      "en": "A rejected etymological segmentation does not automatically invalidate every phonetic, semantic, cognitive, or literary observation contained in the original note.",
      "zh-Hans": "一个历史拆词假说被否定，并不意味着原始笔记中包含的声音、语义、认知或文学观察都随之失效。"
    },
    {
      "en": "Translation Status ≠ Mapping Status ≠ Historical Relation ≠ Active Association Status. Primary Mapping Status Supported is scoped to the standard lexical translation; the association is Author-proposed and the two related candidates remain Candidate. Rejected is scoped to historical segmentation only.",
      "zh-Hans": "Translation Status ≠ Mapping Status ≠ Historical Relation ≠ Active Association Status。主要 Mapping Status Supported 仅限标准词义对应；主动联系为 Author-proposed，两个相关候选仍为 Candidate。Rejected 仅限历史拆分。"
    },
    {
      "en": "The old a- = absence and band = group mnemonic, donate and 动 remain raw-note observations without new records or experimental promotion. Ban/banal historical relatedness requires family deduplication; no controlled result is claimed.",
      "zh-Hans": "旧 a-＝没有、band＝帮伙记忆法以及 donate、动保留为原始观察，不另建记录或提升实验等级。ban／banal 词史关联须作家族去重；不声称已有对照实验结果。"
    },
    {
      "en": "Meaning first, consonant second.",
      "zh-Hans": "先定语义，再验辅音。"
    },
    {
      "en": "Semantic Path studies how one word’s historical meanings develop. Consonant Group Mapping compares an English/French historical word or root with the pronunciation of a semantically selected Chinese candidate. These are independent analyses. The b-p-m-f, d-t-n-l, g-k-h and z-c-s groups predict cross-language sound correspondences, not membership of every Chinese word in one path.",
      "zh-Hans": "Semantic Path 研究一个词的历史语义怎样发展。Consonant Group Mapping 比较英／法历史词或词根与按语义选出的汉语候选词读音。两者独立；b-p-m-f、d-t-n-l、g-k-h、z-c-s 等组预测跨语言声音对应，不要求汉语路径中的每个字属于同组。"
    },
    {
      "en": "The earlier Chinese same-group path design was an implementation error and has been withdrawn. Its path scores and planned path-constraint experiment are superseded, not evidence against the author’s cross-language hypothesis. This is retrospective editorial review, not a blinded study; no experiment has run.",
      "zh-Hans": "此前要求汉语全链同组的设计属于实现误解，已撤下；相应路径评分与路径约束实验计划作废，不构成对作者跨语言假说的反证。本次为回顾性编辑核验，不是盲评，未运行实验。"
    },
    {
      "en": "Dialect & Diachronic Chinese Evidence is a separate evidence track. Record dialect/location/date and transcription separately from Middle Chinese or Old Chinese reconstructions, with named sources and reconstruction systems. Modern dialects are not frozen copies of ancient Chinese. No dialect or reconstructed pronunciation is used to raise this candidate’s grade; these comparisons remain pending.",
      "zh-Hans": "Dialect & Diachronic Chinese Evidence｜汉语方言与历时音韵证据独立记录。方言须注明地点、年代与转写；中古音／上古音须注明来源与重构体系，不能混用。现代方言不是古汉语的冻结复制品。本候选未以方言或重构音提高等级，相关比较待核验。"
    },
    {
      "en": "abash ↔ 怕 pà (medial b ↔ p) and bash ↔ 拍 pāi (initial b ↔ p) are two other separately identified Candidate observations. Sharing b-p-m-f does not make them prove each other or bandon ↔ 办. Statistical independence requires etymological-family review; count related derivatives once.",
      "zh-Hans": "abash ↔ 怕 pà（词中 b ↔ p）与 bash ↔ 拍 pāi（词首 b ↔ p）是另外两个分别记录的 Candidate 观察。共享 b-p-m-f 不使它们互相证明，也不证明 bandon ↔ 办；统计独立性仍需词源家族核验，同源派生须去重。"
    }
  ],
  "search_terms": [
    "abandon",
    "abandonment",
    "放弃",
    "遗弃",
    "甭",
    "beng",
    "ban",
    "give up",
    "leave",
    "抛弃",
    "离弃",
    "旁",
    "páng",
    "pang",
    "放到一旁",
    "abandonner",
    "banal",
    "般",
    "bān",
    "一般",
    "yiban",
    "donner",
    "捅",
    "捅钱",
    "tōng",
    "tǒng",
    "tong",
    "béng",
    "band",
    "bande",
    "a.ban.don",
    "a + ban + donner",
    "禁止给",
    "relinquish",
    "bandon",
    "à bandon",
    "a bandon",
    "柄",
    "权柄",
    "辦",
    "办",
    "bàn",
    "b-p-m-f",
    "历时语义路径",
    "bandon ↔ 办",
    "Meaning first, consonant second",
    "先定语义，再验辅音",
    "d-t-n-l",
    "g-k-h",
    "z-c-s",
    "放",
    "fàng",
    "abandon ↔ 放"
  ],
  "page": "words/abandon.html",
  "legacy": {
    "batch_id": "LEGACY-WEBSITE-IMPORT-BATCH-001",
    "source_url": "https://languagesbook.com/glossary/abandon/",
    "additional_source_urls": [],
    "source_page": 1,
    "source_site": "languagesbook.com"
  },
  "source": {
    "type": "author-published legacy website note",
    "author": "Jinkai Liu",
    "status": "Preserved Original Author Hypothesis; historical segmentation Rejected/Unsupported; local observations independently evaluated",
    "normalization": "Earlier imported raw note retained at the start and in revision_history. Full author-supplied text appended; UI Search labels and HTML styling/entities normalized; erroneous segmentation, meanings and spellings are preserved as observations, not silently corrected.",
    "raw_note": "abandon，放弃。甭 beng。ban 与甭同音。\n\n2026-09-07 作者补充全文（保留词义／拆分／拼写；仅去除界面 Search 与 HTML 格式）：\nabandon，放弃。甭beng。ban与甭同音\n英語\nabandon [ə'bændən] v. 放弃 [<法语]\na.ban.don\nabandonment [ə'bændənmənt] n. 抛弃 [<法语]\nban [bæn] v. 禁止 [<法语]\nbanal [banal] a. 一般的，平凡.般。可以对应般ban\nband n. 一帮，一伙\n法語\nabandonner [abandonner] v. 抛弃\na.ban.don.ner\nban v. 禁止。可以用甭beng这个字代表。\ndonner v. 送。用捅tong字对应，给谁的意思，捅钱。\n漢語\n甭【beng】v. 用法语ban禁止对应，英语ban禁止对应。\n旁【pang】n. 旁边的旁字变成使动的用法，放到一旁，抛弃。与法语ban禁止对应，英语ban禁止对应。这里给一个可能性而已。\n捅【tong】v. 给的意思。与法语donner给字对应，与英语donate给予对应。\n动【dong】v.\n备注：为什么这里分开ban而不是band，因为这个词从法语来，法语里面没有band这个词，是bande包扎。法语中有ban禁止，interdict禁止。法语donner，给的意思。合起来就是禁止给=放弃。如果仅仅从英语角度也可以有这样的解释：a- [a] pref. 没有的意思，用罢ba字对应。band [band] n. 帮伙。不过仅仅是记忆方便这样说，因为这个词从法语而来最后还是从法语角度介绍为好。现在考虑abadon这个词"
  },
  "batch": {
    "batch_id": "LEGACY-WEBSITE-IMPORT-BATCH-001",
    "ordinal": 10,
    "disposition": "Candidate",
    "priority_score": 90.7
  },
  "translation_status": "Supported",
  "translation_source_refs": [
    "REF-CAMBRIDGE-ABANDON",
    "REF-MW-ABANDON"
  ],
  "active_association_status": "Author-proposed / Cognitive association",
  "featured_mapping": {
    "source": "abandon",
    "target": "放",
    "reading": "fàng",
    "status": "Phonetic-Semantic Candidate · Low confidence",
    "historical_relation": "Not claimed",
    "display_label": "Whole-word mapping · 整词映射 · LET GO / RELEASE → 放 · b ↔ f Candidate",
    "source_refs": [
      "REF-CNRTL-ABANDONNER",
      "REF-ZDIC-FANG",
      "REF-MW-ABANDON"
    ],
    "boundary": {
      "en": "Whole-word mapping: abandon ↔ 放 fàng. Select 放 for LET GO / RELEASE before comparing sound. CNRTL records release of a rein around 1100 in the French history, and Chinese 放 has an independently documented release sense. This is a scoped historical-semantic bridge, not a claim that 放 alone translates every modern use of abandon.",
      "zh-Hans": "整词映射：abandon ↔ 放 fàng。先按 LET GO／RELEASE 选择“放”，再比较声音。CNRTL 记法语词史中约1100年的松开缰绳义；汉语“放”另有独立的释放义证据。这是限定语义的历时联系，不表示单字“放”可翻译 abandon 的所有现代用法。"
    },
    "candidate_ref": "MAP-ABANDON-FANG-001"
  },
  "revision_history": [
    {
      "date": "2026-09-07",
      "previous_version": "Legacy Website Import Batch 001 / Schema v1.0",
      "previous_source": {
        "type": "author-published legacy website note",
        "author": "Jinkai Liu",
        "status": "Preserved; claims independently classified above",
        "normalization": "Legacy title/body excerpt retained; punctuation normalized only where needed for readability.",
        "raw_note": "abandon，放弃。甭 beng。ban 与甭同音。"
      },
      "previous_hypotheses": [
        {
          "hypothesis_id": "UNI-LEGACY-ABANDON-001",
          "type": "Original Author Hypothesis / legacy phonetic-semantic observation",
          "claim": {
            "en": "Jinkai Liu’s original note is preserved verbatim: “abandon，放弃。甭 beng。ban 与甭同音。”",
            "zh-Hans": "Jinkai Liu 原始观察逐字保留：“abandon，放弃。甭 beng。ban 与甭同音。”"
          },
          "status": "Candidate",
          "confidence": "Low",
          "supporting_cases": [
            "abandon",
            "放弃／遗弃"
          ],
          "counterexamples": [
            "Modern English ban and French donner should not be retrofitted as the components of abandon.",
            "No regular cross-language sound correspondence has been demonstrated."
          ],
          "testability": {
            "en": "Test phonetic similarity and semantic fit separately with blinded controls and independent historical review.",
            "zh-Hans": "以盲法对照和独立词源核验分别测试声音相似度与语义适配。"
          },
          "experiment_link": null,
          "source_refs": [
            "REF-LANGUAGESBOOK-ABANDON",
            "REF-MW-ABANDON"
          ]
        }
      ],
      "previous_cognitive_evidence": {
        "status": "Interpretive",
        "confidence": "Medium",
        "summary": {
          "en": "‘甭／不要了’ can serve as a colloquial memory cue for GIVE UP, without becoming morphology.",
          "zh-Hans": "“甭／不要了”可作 GIVE UP 的口语记忆提示，但不是构词分析。"
        },
        "items": [
          {
            "evidence_id": "COG-ABANDON-001",
            "claim": {
              "en": "‘甭／不要了’ can serve as a colloquial memory cue for GIVE UP, without becoming morphology.",
              "zh-Hans": "“甭／不要了”可作 GIVE UP 的口语记忆提示，但不是构词分析。"
            },
            "status": "Interpretive",
            "confidence": "Medium",
            "source_refs": [
              "REF-LANGUAGESBOOK-ABANDON"
            ]
          }
        ],
        "source_refs": [
          "REF-LANGUAGESBOOK-ABANDON"
        ]
      },
      "previous_literary_layer": {
        "status": "Preserved from legacy note",
        "is_historical_evidence": false,
        "proposition": {
          "en": "‘甭／不要了’ can serve as a colloquial memory cue for GIVE UP, without becoming morphology.",
          "zh-Hans": "“甭／不要了”可作 GIVE UP 的口语记忆提示，但不是构词分析。"
        },
        "essay_prose": [],
        "poem_lyrics": [],
        "translations": [],
        "archival_manuscript_media": [],
        "evidence_boundary": {
          "en": "The legacy image may be developed as literature or mnemonic, but it is not historical evidence.",
          "zh-Hans": "旧站意象可作为文学或记忆法展开，但不是历史证据。"
        }
      },
      "reason": "Upgrade in place; replace abandon/甭 mnemonic with 旁 association; evaluate local candidates independently."
    },
    {
      "date": "2026-09-07",
      "previous_version": "ABANDON Semantic Network v1.0 / Schema v1.0",
      "previous_featured_mapping": {
        "source": "abandon",
        "target": "旁",
        "reading": "páng",
        "status": "Author-proposed / Cognitive association · Level C",
        "historical_relation": "Not claimed",
        "display_label": "Active Association · 放到一旁 → 旁 · NOT etymology",
        "source_refs": [
          "REF-LANGUAGESBOOK-ABANDON",
          "REF-AUTHOR-ABANDON-20260907"
        ],
        "boundary": {
          "en": "Active Association: abandon ↔ 放到一旁 → 旁 páng. CONTROL / DISPOSAL → RELEASE → PUT ASIDE → LEAVE/GIVE UP is an author-proposed cognitive and memory bridge, not an attested chain of sound change or translation of 旁 as abandon. Historical Relation: Not claimed; Active Association Status: Author-proposed / Cognitive association.",
          "zh-Hans": "Active Association：abandon ↔ 放到一旁 → 旁 páng。CONTROL / DISPOSAL → RELEASE → PUT ASIDE → LEAVE/GIVE UP 是作者提出的认知与记忆桥梁，不是已证历史音变链，也不把单字“旁”当作 abandon 的标准译词。Historical Relation: Not claimed；Active Association Status: Author-proposed / Cognitive association。"
        }
      },
      "previous_semantic_structure": {
        "concepts": [
          "CONTROL",
          "DISPOSAL",
          "RELEASE",
          "PUT ASIDE",
          "LEAVE",
          "GIVE UP"
        ],
        "relation": "CONTROL / DISPOSAL → RELEASE → PUT ASIDE → LEAVE/GIVE UP",
        "status": "Interpretive / Active Association; not a historical chain"
      },
      "reason": "Promote two explicitly graded semantic paths; retain prior associations and raw note."
    },
    {
      "date": "2026-09-07",
      "previous_version": "ABANDON Dual Semantic Paths v1.0 / Schema v1.0",
      "supersedes_commit": "3f621306bef5af940cf8ea724d1010c1a1e66eb3",
      "reason": "The earlier Chinese same-group path design was an implementation error and has been withdrawn. Its path scores and planned path-constraint experiment are superseded, not evidence against the author’s cross-language hypothesis. This is retrospective editorial review, not a blinded study; no experiment has run.",
      "retained_source_note": true
    }
  ],
  "author_usage_observation": {
    "author": "Jinkai Liu",
    "raw_text": "捅钱=给钱",
    "author_reading": "tōng",
    "standard_reading": "tǒng",
    "status": "Original Author Usage Observation / unverified give sense",
    "independent_evaluation": {
      "en": "donner ↔ 捅: Weak Active Association / Original Author Association, not a primary mapping. French donner means give and descends from Latin donare. The supplied “捅钱 = 给钱” and reading tōng remain Original Author Usage Observation; standard Mandarin dictionaries give 捅 tǒng (poke/pierce, reveal, provoke), not a verified stable give sense. The targeted dictionary/dialect search did not establish that sense; this is a bounded evidence gap, not proof that no speaker uses it. Historical Relation: Not claimed. Donner is not a historical component of abandon.",
      "zh-Hans": "donner ↔ 捅：Weak Active Association / Original Author Association，不作主要映射。法语 donner 意为给，源自拉丁语 donare。用户的“捅钱＝给钱”及 tōng 读法保留为 Original Author Usage Observation；标准普通话词典记“捅”tǒng（戳刺、揭露、招惹），没有核验出稳定的给予义。此次词典／方言检索未能证实该义，不等于证明无人这样使用。Historical Relation: Not claimed。donner 不是 abandon 的历史构词部分。"
    },
    "source_refs": [
      "REF-CNRTL-DONNER",
      "REF-ZDIC-TONG",
      "REF-LANGUAGESBOOK-ABANDON",
      "REF-AUTHOR-ABANDON-20260907"
    ],
    "is_historical_evidence": false
  },
  "diachronic_semantic_mapping": {
    "model_version": "0.1",
    "historical_stages": [
      {
        "stage_id": "bandon",
        "form": "BANDON",
        "variants": [],
        "unit_kind": "lemma",
        "language": {
          "name": "Old French",
          "code": null
        },
        "period": {
          "label": "Old French; exact attestation interval not assigned",
          "start_year": null,
          "end_year": null,
          "basis": "language_period",
          "source_refs": [
            "REF-CNRTL-ABANDON"
          ]
        },
        "attestation_status": "attested",
        "meaning": {
          "gloss": "POWER / AUTHORITY / CONTROL",
          "pos": null,
          "constraints": []
        },
        "pronunciations": [],
        "relations": [],
        "source_refs": [
          "REF-CNRTL-ABANDON"
        ],
        "evidence_status": "mediated",
        "mapping_selection": "selected",
        "selection_note": "CNRTL identifies bandon as power/authority. Do not assign RELEASE to this root."
      },
      {
        "stage_id": "a-bandon",
        "form": "À BANDON",
        "variants": [
          "a bandon",
          "a bandun"
        ],
        "unit_kind": "phrase",
        "language": {
          "name": "Old French phrase",
          "code": null
        },
        "period": {
          "label": "Old French phrase; exact interval not assigned",
          "start_year": null,
          "end_year": null,
          "basis": "language_period",
          "source_refs": [
            "REF-CNRTL-ABANDON",
            "REF-MW-ABANDON"
          ]
        },
        "attestation_status": "attested",
        "meaning": {
          "gloss": "at someone’s power/disposal — DISPOSAL RELATION",
          "pos": null,
          "constraints": []
        },
        "pronunciations": [],
        "relations": [
          {
            "from_stage_ref": "bandon",
            "relation_type": "derivation",
            "semantic_operation": {
              "type": "derivation",
              "description": "Phrase encodes disposal under another’s authority.",
              "status": "supported"
            },
            "status": "supported",
            "source_refs": [
              "REF-CNRTL-ABANDON",
              "REF-MW-ABANDON"
            ]
          }
        ],
        "source_refs": [
          "REF-CNRTL-ABANDON",
          "REF-MW-ABANDON"
        ],
        "evidence_status": "mediated",
        "mapping_selection": "not_selected",
        "selection_note": "The phrase places something at another’s disposal; this is a relation of authority, not simply the act of handling it. Old French a bandon and Anglo-French a bandun are source forms; À is a normalized display."
      },
      {
        "stage_id": "abandonner",
        "form": "ABANDONNER",
        "variants": [],
        "unit_kind": "lemma",
        "language": {
          "name": "Old French → French",
          "code": null
        },
        "period": {
          "label": "Release of a rein c.1100; leaving from 12th century; overlapping senses",
          "start_year": null,
          "end_year": null,
          "basis": "attestation",
          "source_refs": [
            "REF-CNRTL-ABANDONNER",
            "REF-CNRTL-ABANDON"
          ]
        },
        "attestation_status": "attested",
        "meaning": {
          "gloss": "GIVE OVER / leave to another’s disposal; RELEASE / LET GO; LEAVE",
          "pos": null,
          "constraints": []
        },
        "pronunciations": [],
        "relations": [
          {
            "from_stage_ref": "a-bandon",
            "relation_type": "related_family",
            "semantic_operation": {
              "type": "related_family",
              "description": "Abbreviated family through noun abandon/abandun; not a direct dated sense ladder.",
              "status": "supported"
            },
            "status": "supported",
            "source_refs": [
              "REF-CNRTL-ABANDONNER",
              "REF-CNRTL-ABANDON"
            ]
          }
        ],
        "source_refs": [
          "REF-CNRTL-ABANDONNER",
          "REF-CNRTL-ABANDON"
        ],
        "evidence_status": "mediated",
        "mapping_selection": "not_selected",
        "selection_note": "The display abbreviates a family including the noun abandon/abandun. CNRTL derives the verb from abandon and records release of a rein around 1100 and leaving entirely from the 12th century. These overlapping senses prevent treating TRANSFER then RELEASE as a proven chronological ladder."
      },
      {
        "stage_id": "english-abandon",
        "form": "ABANDON",
        "variants": [],
        "unit_kind": "lemma",
        "language": {
          "name": "Middle English → English verb",
          "code": null
        },
        "period": {
          "label": "Middle English attested 14th century; modern senses compared",
          "start_year": null,
          "end_year": null,
          "basis": "attestation",
          "source_refs": [
            "REF-MW-ABANDON"
          ]
        },
        "attestation_status": "attested",
        "meaning": {
          "gloss": "GIVE UP / LEAVE / DESERT",
          "pos": null,
          "constraints": []
        },
        "pronunciations": [
          {
            "pronunciation_id": "PR-ABANDON",
            "value": "medial /b/ after initial /ə/; remaining whole-word segments not fully transcribed in this observation",
            "notation": "source_notation",
            "phonological_layer": "Modern English",
            "period": {
              "label": "Modern reference; exact documentation date not inferred",
              "start_year": null,
              "end_year": null,
              "basis": "modern_reference",
              "source_refs": []
            },
            "variety": "Modern English",
            "system": "Existing entry transcription; see original scoped assessment",
            "status": "documented",
            "source_refs": [
              "REF-CNRTL-ABANDONNER",
              "REF-ZDIC-FANG",
              "REF-MW-ABANDON"
            ]
          }
        ],
        "relations": [
          {
            "from_stage_ref": "abandonner",
            "relation_type": "borrowing",
            "semantic_operation": {
              "type": "borrowing",
              "description": "Through Anglo-French abanduner; intermediates summarized, not omitted evidence.",
              "status": "supported"
            },
            "status": "supported",
            "source_refs": [
              "REF-MW-ABANDON"
            ]
          }
        ],
        "source_refs": [
          "REF-MW-ABANDON"
        ],
        "evidence_status": "mediated",
        "mapping_selection": "selected",
        "selection_note": "Middle English abandounen, attested in the 14th century, was borrowed through Anglo-French abanduner. Modern meanings include relinquishing an interest and withdrawing support. The later English noun is separate."
      }
    ],
    "mappings": [
      {
        "stage_mapping_id": "SM-bandon",
        "stage_ref": "bandon",
        "selection_reasons": [
          "explanatory_value"
        ],
        "freeze": {
          "version": "0.1",
          "meaning_note": "POWER / AUTHORITY / CONTROL",
          "excluded_senses": [
            "No transfer of a different stage’s meaning or pronunciation"
          ],
          "status": "editor_reviewed"
        },
        "search": {
          "status": "candidates_recorded",
          "scope": {
            "lexical_layers": [
              "Modern Mandarin"
            ],
            "phonological_layers": [
              "Existing documented reference pronunciations only"
            ],
            "semantic_seeds": [
              "POWER / AUTHORITY / CONTROL"
            ],
            "consonant_hypotheses": [
              "b-p-m-f"
            ],
            "note": "Bounded migration of existing candidate inventory; not a new Discovery Work search."
          },
          "run_refs": [],
          "stop_reason": "Existing review retained. No forced Chinese winner; unresolved evidence remains Pending."
        },
        "candidates": [
          {
            "candidate_id": "MAP-BANDON-BAN-001",
            "family_key": "legacy-abandon",
            "target": {
              "form": "办 / 辦",
              "lexical_layer": "Modern Mandarin",
              "language_variety": "Modern Mandarin",
              "period": {
                "label": "Modern Mandarin reference; historical attestations remain in Research",
                "start_year": null,
                "end_year": null,
                "basis": "modern_reference",
                "source_refs": []
              },
              "meaning": {
                "gloss": "handle/manage/prepare; not POWER/AUTHORITY",
                "pos": null,
                "constraints": []
              },
              "pronunciations": [
                {
                  "pronunciation_id": "ZH-MAP-BANDON-BAN-001",
                  "value": "bàn",
                  "notation": "source_notation",
                  "phonological_layer": "Modern Mandarin",
                  "period": {
                    "label": "Modern reference; exact documentation date not inferred",
                    "start_year": null,
                    "end_year": null,
                    "basis": "modern_reference",
                    "source_refs": []
                  },
                  "variety": "Modern Mandarin",
                  "system": "Existing entry transcription; see original scoped assessment",
                  "status": "documented",
                  "source_refs": [
                    "REF-CNRTL-ABANDON",
                    "REF-ZDIC-BAN-HANDLE",
                    "REF-ZDIC-BAN-TRADITIONAL"
                  ]
                }
              ],
              "source_refs": [
                "REF-CNRTL-ABANDON",
                "REF-ZDIC-BAN-HANDLE",
                "REF-ZDIC-BAN-TRADITIONAL"
              ]
            },
            "comparison": {
              "source_stage_ref": "bandon",
              "source_pronunciation_ref": null,
              "target_pronunciation_ref": "ZH-MAP-BANDON-BAN-001",
              "source_span": "BANDON",
              "scope": "whole_form",
              "hypothesis": {
                "group": "b-p-m-f",
                "hit": true,
                "position": "Selected source segment; not whole-word homophony",
                "version": "legacy hypothesis; not validated"
              }
            },
            "role": "candidate",
            "decision": "shortlisted",
            "semantic_fit": {
              "fit": "indirect",
              "confidence": "Low",
              "rationale": "Bandon means POWER/AUTHORITY; disposal belongs to the relational phrase à bandon. Modern 办/辦 means handle/manage, prepare or deal with. 说文新附 glosses 辦 as exert effort (致力), not authority. Thus bandon ↔ 办 is a limited control/handling association: Low semantic fit for POWER/AUTHORITY, Medium only for a contextual handling/disposal comparison. It is not an exact root translation. 权柄 is the stronger meaning-first support for authority regardless of its sound.",
              "source_refs": [
                "REF-CNRTL-ABANDON",
                "REF-ZDIC-BAN-HANDLE",
                "REF-ZDIC-BAN-TRADITIONAL"
              ]
            },
            "phonetic_fit": {
              "fit": "not_evaluated",
              "confidence": "Unknown",
              "rationale": "Historical source pronunciation Pending. Spelling/group membership is not an evaluated sound match.",
              "features": {
                "onset": "Not separately evaluated in existing research; no new rating.",
                "vowel": "Not separately evaluated in existing research; no new rating.",
                "coda_other_consonants": "Not separately evaluated in existing research; no new rating.",
                "syllables": "Not separately evaluated in existing research; no new rating.",
                "prosody": "Not separately evaluated in existing research; no new rating."
              },
              "source_refs": [
                "REF-CNRTL-ABANDON",
                "REF-ZDIC-BAN-HANDLE",
                "REF-ZDIC-BAN-TRADITIONAL"
              ]
            },
            "evidence": [
              {
                "claim_scope": "chinese_sense",
                "status": "mediated",
                "source_refs": [
                  "REF-CNRTL-ABANDON",
                  "REF-ZDIC-BAN-HANDLE",
                  "REF-ZDIC-BAN-TRADITIONAL"
                ],
                "locator": null,
                "note": "Existing entry’s scoped dictionary/platform evidence; original print edition audit unchanged. Migration is not new verification."
              },
              {
                "claim_scope": "comparison_inference",
                "status": "lead",
                "source_refs": [
                  "REF-CNRTL-ABANDON",
                  "REF-ZDIC-BAN-HANDLE",
                  "REF-ZDIC-BAN-TRADITIONAL"
                ],
                "locator": null,
                "note": "Editorial comparison; previous qualitative levels and unvalidated component scores remain in original Research fields."
              }
            ],
            "historical_relation": {
              "status": "Not claimed",
              "source_refs": [],
              "review_note": "No independent cross-language historical evidence introduced."
            },
            "confounds": [
              "Bandon means POWER/AUTHORITY; disposal belongs to the relational phrase à bandon. Modern 办/辦 means handle/manage, prepare or deal with. 说文新附 glosses 辦 as exert effort (致力), not authority. Thus bandon ↔ 办 is a limited control/handling association: Low semantic fit for POWER/AUTHORITY, Medium only for a contextual handling/disposal comparison. It is not an exact root translation. 权柄 is the stronger meaning-first support for authority regardless of its sound.",
              "Modern Chinese pronunciation is not an ancient reconstruction; resemblance does not establish descent."
            ],
            "discovery_priority": "medium",
            "decision_reason": "办是处理／办理，和 bandon 的权力义仅间接相关；古法语声音仍 Pending。同组标签不能补强语义。",
            "review": {
              "status": "proposed",
              "reviewer": null,
              "date": "2026-09-19",
              "note": "Migration of previously reviewed research; no new linguistic verification or evidence promotion. Existing assessments retained in Research."
            }
          },
          {
            "candidate_id": "CONTROL-BANDON-BING",
            "family_key": "legacy-abandon",
            "target": {
              "form": "柄 / 权柄",
              "lexical_layer": "Modern Mandarin",
              "language_variety": "Modern Mandarin",
              "period": {
                "label": "Modern Mandarin reference; historical attestations remain in Research",
                "start_year": null,
                "end_year": null,
                "basis": "modern_reference",
                "source_refs": []
              },
              "meaning": {
                "gloss": "power / authority",
                "pos": null,
                "constraints": []
              },
              "pronunciations": [
                {
                  "pronunciation_id": "ZH-CONTROL-BANDON-BING",
                  "value": "bǐng",
                  "notation": "source_notation",
                  "phonological_layer": "Modern Mandarin",
                  "period": {
                    "label": "Modern reference; exact documentation date not inferred",
                    "start_year": null,
                    "end_year": null,
                    "basis": "modern_reference",
                    "source_refs": []
                  },
                  "variety": "Modern Mandarin",
                  "system": "Existing entry transcription; see original scoped assessment",
                  "status": "documented",
                  "source_refs": [
                    "REF-ZDIC-BING"
                  ]
                }
              ],
              "source_refs": [
                "REF-ZDIC-BING"
              ]
            },
            "comparison": {
              "source_stage_ref": "bandon",
              "source_pronunciation_ref": null,
              "target_pronunciation_ref": "ZH-CONTROL-BANDON-BING",
              "source_span": "BANDON",
              "scope": "whole_form",
              "hypothesis": {
                "group": null,
                "hit": false,
                "position": "No consonant-group claim",
                "version": "legacy hypothesis; not validated"
              }
            },
            "role": "meaning_control",
            "decision": "reserved",
            "semantic_fit": {
              "fit": "direct",
              "confidence": "High",
              "rationale": "Meaning-first semantic support independent of initial b; historical French sound Pending.",
              "source_refs": [
                "REF-ZDIC-BING"
              ]
            },
            "phonetic_fit": {
              "fit": "not_evaluated",
              "confidence": "Unknown",
              "rationale": "Historical source pronunciation Pending. Spelling/group membership is not an evaluated sound match.",
              "features": {
                "onset": "Not separately evaluated in existing research; no new rating.",
                "vowel": "Not separately evaluated in existing research; no new rating.",
                "coda_other_consonants": "Not separately evaluated in existing research; no new rating.",
                "syllables": "Not separately evaluated in existing research; no new rating.",
                "prosody": "Not separately evaluated in existing research; no new rating."
              },
              "source_refs": [
                "REF-ZDIC-BING"
              ]
            },
            "evidence": [
              {
                "claim_scope": "chinese_sense",
                "status": "mediated",
                "source_refs": [
                  "REF-ZDIC-BING"
                ],
                "locator": null,
                "note": "Existing entry’s scoped dictionary/platform evidence; original print edition audit unchanged. Migration is not new verification."
              },
              {
                "claim_scope": "comparison_inference",
                "status": "lead",
                "source_refs": [
                  "REF-ZDIC-BING"
                ],
                "locator": null,
                "note": "Editorial comparison; previous qualitative levels and unvalidated component scores remain in original Research fields."
              }
            ],
            "historical_relation": {
              "status": "Not claimed",
              "source_refs": [],
              "review_note": "No independent cross-language historical evidence introduced."
            },
            "confounds": [
              "Meaning-first semantic support independent of initial b; historical French sound Pending.",
              "Modern Chinese pronunciation is not an ancient reconstruction; resemblance does not establish descent."
            ],
            "discovery_priority": "none",
            "decision_reason": "Meaning-first semantic support independent of initial b; historical French sound Pending.",
            "review": {
              "status": "proposed",
              "reviewer": null,
              "date": "2026-09-19",
              "note": "Migration of previously reviewed research; no new linguistic verification or evidence promotion. Existing assessments retained in Research."
            }
          }
        ],
        "review": {
          "status": "proposed",
          "reviewer": null,
          "date": "2026-09-19",
          "note": "Migration of previously reviewed research; no new linguistic verification or evidence promotion. Existing assessments retained in Research."
        }
      },
      {
        "stage_mapping_id": "SM-english-abandon",
        "stage_ref": "english-abandon",
        "selection_reasons": [
          "explanatory_value",
          "phonetic_form_value"
        ],
        "freeze": {
          "version": "0.1",
          "meaning_note": "GIVE UP / LEAVE / DESERT",
          "excluded_senses": [
            "No transfer of a different stage’s meaning or pronunciation"
          ],
          "status": "editor_reviewed"
        },
        "search": {
          "status": "candidates_recorded",
          "scope": {
            "lexical_layers": [
              "Modern Mandarin"
            ],
            "phonological_layers": [
              "Existing documented reference pronunciations only"
            ],
            "semantic_seeds": [
              "GIVE UP / LEAVE / DESERT"
            ],
            "consonant_hypotheses": [
              "b-p-m-f"
            ],
            "note": "Bounded migration of existing candidate inventory; not a new Discovery Work search."
          },
          "run_refs": [],
          "stop_reason": "Existing review retained. No forced Chinese winner; unresolved evidence remains Pending."
        },
        "candidates": [
          {
            "candidate_id": "MAP-ABANDON-FANG-001",
            "family_key": "legacy-abandon",
            "target": {
              "form": "放",
              "lexical_layer": "Modern Mandarin",
              "language_variety": "Modern Mandarin",
              "period": {
                "label": "Modern Mandarin reference; historical attestations remain in Research",
                "start_year": null,
                "end_year": null,
                "basis": "modern_reference",
                "source_refs": []
              },
              "meaning": {
                "gloss": "let go / release",
                "pos": null,
                "constraints": []
              },
              "pronunciations": [
                {
                  "pronunciation_id": "ZH-MAP-ABANDON-FANG-001",
                  "value": "fàng",
                  "notation": "source_notation",
                  "phonological_layer": "Modern Mandarin",
                  "period": {
                    "label": "Modern reference; exact documentation date not inferred",
                    "start_year": null,
                    "end_year": null,
                    "basis": "modern_reference",
                    "source_refs": []
                  },
                  "variety": "Modern Mandarin",
                  "system": "Existing entry transcription; see original scoped assessment",
                  "status": "documented",
                  "source_refs": [
                    "REF-CNRTL-ABANDONNER",
                    "REF-ZDIC-FANG",
                    "REF-MW-ABANDON"
                  ]
                }
              ],
              "source_refs": [
                "REF-CNRTL-ABANDONNER",
                "REF-ZDIC-FANG",
                "REF-MW-ABANDON"
              ]
            },
            "comparison": {
              "source_stage_ref": "english-abandon",
              "source_pronunciation_ref": "PR-ABANDON",
              "target_pronunciation_ref": "ZH-MAP-ABANDON-FANG-001",
              "source_span": "abandon; sound test restricted to medial /b/",
              "scope": "syllable",
              "hypothesis": {
                "group": "b-p-m-f",
                "hit": true,
                "position": "Selected source segment; not whole-word homophony",
                "version": "legacy hypothesis; not validated"
              }
            },
            "role": "candidate",
            "decision": "shortlisted",
            "semantic_fit": {
              "fit": "partial",
              "confidence": "Low",
              "rationale": "Whole-word mapping: abandon ↔ 放 fàng. Select 放 for LET GO / RELEASE before comparing sound. CNRTL records release of a rein around 1100 in the French history, and Chinese 放 has an independently documented release sense. This is a scoped historical-semantic bridge, not a claim that 放 alone translates every modern use of abandon.",
              "source_refs": [
                "REF-CNRTL-ABANDONNER",
                "REF-ZDIC-FANG",
                "REF-MW-ABANDON"
              ]
            },
            "phonetic_fit": {
              "fit": "weak",
              "confidence": "Low",
              "rationale": "Compare the /b/ after initial /ə/ in English abandon with Mandarin f /f/ in fàng: b ↔ f falls within the proposed b-p-m-f group. This is a medial-to-initial segment comparison, not whole-word homophony; voicing, place/manner, remaining segments and tone differ. Group membership does not prove a sound law or historical relation.",
              "features": {
                "onset": "English medial /b/ vs Mandarin initial /f/: voicing and manner/place differ.",
                "vowel": "Not separately evaluated in existing research; no new rating.",
                "coda_other_consonants": "Not separately evaluated in existing research; no new rating.",
                "syllables": "Not separately evaluated in existing research; no new rating.",
                "prosody": "Not separately evaluated in existing research; no new rating."
              },
              "source_refs": [
                "REF-CNRTL-ABANDONNER",
                "REF-ZDIC-FANG",
                "REF-MW-ABANDON"
              ]
            },
            "evidence": [
              {
                "claim_scope": "chinese_sense",
                "status": "mediated",
                "source_refs": [
                  "REF-CNRTL-ABANDONNER",
                  "REF-ZDIC-FANG",
                  "REF-MW-ABANDON"
                ],
                "locator": null,
                "note": "Existing entry’s scoped dictionary/platform evidence; original print edition audit unchanged. Migration is not new verification."
              },
              {
                "claim_scope": "comparison_inference",
                "status": "lead",
                "source_refs": [
                  "REF-CNRTL-ABANDONNER",
                  "REF-ZDIC-FANG",
                  "REF-MW-ABANDON"
                ],
                "locator": null,
                "note": "Editorial comparison; previous qualitative levels and unvalidated component scores remain in original Research fields."
              }
            ],
            "historical_relation": {
              "status": "Not claimed",
              "source_refs": [],
              "review_note": "No independent cross-language historical evidence introduced."
            },
            "confounds": [
              "Whole-word mapping: abandon ↔ 放 fàng. Select 放 for LET GO / RELEASE before comparing sound. CNRTL records release of a rein around 1100 in the French history, and Chinese 放 has an independently documented release sense. This is a scoped historical-semantic bridge, not a claim that 放 alone translates every modern use of abandon.",
              "Modern Chinese pronunciation is not an ancient reconstruction; resemblance does not establish descent."
            ],
            "discovery_priority": "medium",
            "decision_reason": "Whole-word mapping: abandon ↔ 放 fàng. Select 放 for LET GO / RELEASE before comparing sound. CNRTL records release of a rein around 1100 in the French history, and Chinese 放 has an independently documented release sense. This is a scoped historical-semantic bridge, not a claim that 放 alone translates every modern use of abandon.",
            "review": {
              "status": "proposed",
              "reviewer": null,
              "date": "2026-09-19",
              "note": "Migration of previously reviewed research; no new linguistic verification or evidence promotion. Existing assessments retained in Research."
            }
          }
        ],
        "review": {
          "status": "proposed",
          "reviewer": null,
          "date": "2026-09-19",
          "note": "Migration of previously reviewed research; no new linguistic verification or evidence promotion. Existing assessments retained in Research."
        }
      }
    ],
    "display_selection": {
      "featured_candidate_ref": "MAP-ABANDON-FANG-001",
      "stage_cards": [
        {
          "stage_mapping_ref": "SM-bandon",
          "candidate_ref": "MAP-BANDON-BAN-001"
        }
      ],
      "review_status": "approved",
      "reviewer": "Jinkai Liu",
      "reason": "沿用整词 LET GO / RELEASE → 放的编辑选择（Low）。声音只比较 abandon 词中 /b/ 与 fàng 起音；不是整词同音，也不涵盖全部现代义。历史 bandon 的权力义另列。"
    },
    "historical_path": "BANDON → À BANDON → ABANDONNER → ABANDON",
    "semantic_path": "POWER / AUTHORITY → DISPOSAL → GIVE OVER → LET GO → GIVE UP",
    "boundary": {
      "en": "Historical meanings and attested forms remain separated. The arrows summarize semantic development, not five strictly successive first-attestation dates. No Chinese same-group path is inferred.",
      "zh-Hans": "历史词形与义项保留边界；箭头概括语义发展，不是五个严格递进的首见年代，不推导汉语同组路径。"
    }
  },
  "consonant_group_mapping": {
    "version": "1.0",
    "principle": {
      "en": "Meaning first, consonant second.",
      "zh-Hans": "先定语义，再验辅音。"
    },
    "definitions": {
      "en": "Semantic Path studies how one word’s historical meanings develop. Consonant Group Mapping compares an English/French historical word or root with the pronunciation of a semantically selected Chinese candidate. These are independent analyses. The b-p-m-f, d-t-n-l, g-k-h and z-c-s groups predict cross-language sound correspondences, not membership of every Chinese word in one path.",
      "zh-Hans": "Semantic Path 研究一个词的历史语义怎样发展。Consonant Group Mapping 比较英／法历史词或词根与按语义选出的汉语候选词读音。两者独立；b-p-m-f、d-t-n-l、g-k-h、z-c-s 等组预测跨语言声音对应，不要求汉语路径中的每个字属于同组。"
    },
    "predicted_groups": [
      "b-p-m-f",
      "d-t-n-l",
      "g-k-h",
      "z-c-s"
    ],
    "workflow": [
      {
        "en": "Identify the historical English/French word or root.",
        "zh-Hans": "① 确定英／法历史词或词根。"
      },
      {
        "en": "Verify its historical semantic meaning and phrase boundaries.",
        "zh-Hans": "② 核验历史语义与短语边界。"
      },
      {
        "en": "Select the best Chinese character/word by meaning independently of sound; retain alternatives.",
        "zh-Hans": "③ 先按语义独立选择最合适的汉字／词，保留替代候选。"
      },
      {
        "en": "Only then compare the English/French consonant with the Chinese pronunciation.",
        "zh-Hans": "④ 再比较英／法辅音与汉语读音。"
      },
      {
        "en": "Check the predicted b-p-m-f / d-t-n-l / g-k-h / z-c-s correspondence without requiring a same-group Chinese chain.",
        "zh-Hans": "⑤ 检查是否落入预测辅音组，不要求汉语路径全链同组。"
      },
      {
        "en": "Score semantics, consonant-group fit, phonetic evidence and historical relation independently.",
        "zh-Hans": "⑥ 独立评分：语义、辅音组适配、音值证据与历史关系。"
      },
      {
        "en": "Test later with large samples, counterexamples, matched/random controls and etymological-family deduplication; preregister segments, sources and exclusions.",
        "zh-Hans": "⑦ 将来以大样本、反例、匹配／随机控制及词源家族去重实验验证；预注册片段、来源与排除条件。"
      }
    ],
    "candidates": [
      {
        "candidate_id": "MAP-BANDON-BAN-001",
        "source_unit": "bandon",
        "source_language": "Old French",
        "target": "办 / 辦",
        "reading": "bàn",
        "status": "Phonetic-Semantic Candidate",
        "historical_relation": "Not claimed",
        "semantic_evaluation": {
          "en": "Bandon means POWER/AUTHORITY; disposal belongs to the relational phrase à bandon. Modern 办/辦 means handle/manage, prepare or deal with. 说文新附 glosses 辦 as exert effort (致力), not authority. Thus bandon ↔ 办 is a limited control/handling association: Low semantic fit for POWER/AUTHORITY, Medium only for a contextual handling/disposal comparison. It is not an exact root translation. 权柄 is the stronger meaning-first support for authority regardless of its sound.",
          "zh-Hans": "bandon 的核心是 POWER/AUTHORITY；任其处置关系属于 à bandon。现代办／辦为处理、办理、筹备等；《说文新附》释辦为致力，不是权力。因此 bandon ↔ 办仅保留为支配／办理的有限联系：对权力本义语义适配 Low，只有在处理／处置语境比较时为 Medium，不是词根的精确译词。权柄是更合适的权力义支持，其声音不决定选择。"
        },
        "consonant_comparison": {
          "source_segment": "initial b in bandon",
          "target_segment": "Pinyin b in bàn",
          "label": "b ↔ b → same consonant / within b-p-m-f group",
          "predicted_group": "b-p-m-f",
          "group_fit": "Within predicted group at comparison-label level",
          "phonetic_evidence_status": "Historical source pronunciation pending; Pinyin b is /p/",
          "note": {
            "en": "b ↔ b → same consonant / within b-p-m-f group is the author’s comparison label. It compares the initial b of bandon with Pinyin b in bàn. Pinyin b represents unaspirated /p/; the label is not proof of identical phonetic realization, homophony, or a historical sound law. A source-specific historical French pronunciation and the remaining consonants, vowels and tone still need independent assessment. Group fit cannot upgrade weak semantics.",
            "zh-Hans": "b ↔ b → same consonant / within b-p-m-f group 是作者的对应标签：比较 bandon 的词首 b 与 bàn 的拼音 b。拼音 b 表示不送气 /p/；此标签不证明实际音值完全相同、同音或历史音变规律。古法语具体时期的读音及其余辅音、元音、汉语声调仍须独立评估。落入预测组不能提升较弱的语义证据。"
          }
        },
        "scores": {
          "semantic_fit_power_authority": "Low",
          "semantic_fit_contextual_handling": "Medium",
          "consonant_group_fit": "Within predicted group",
          "overall_confidence": "Low",
          "scale": "Editorial categories, not measured scientific scores"
        },
        "source_refs": [
          "REF-CNRTL-ABANDON",
          "REF-ZDIC-BAN-HANDLE",
          "REF-ZDIC-BAN-TRADITIONAL"
        ],
        "semantic_support": {
          "form": "柄 / 权柄",
          "role": "POWER/AUTHORITY Semantic Support",
          "selection": "Meaning first, independent of onset",
          "source_refs": [
            "REF-ZDIC-BING"
          ]
        },
        "mapping_scope": "root"
      },
      {
        "candidate_id": "MAP-ABANDON-FANG-001",
        "mapping_scope": "whole-word",
        "source_unit": "abandon",
        "source_language": "English; French historical semantic evidence",
        "target": "放",
        "reading": "fàng",
        "status": "Phonetic-Semantic Candidate",
        "historical_relation": "Not claimed",
        "semantic_evaluation": {
          "en": "Whole-word mapping: abandon ↔ 放 fàng. Select 放 for LET GO / RELEASE before comparing sound. CNRTL records release of a rein around 1100 in the French history, and Chinese 放 has an independently documented release sense. This is a scoped historical-semantic bridge, not a claim that 放 alone translates every modern use of abandon.",
          "zh-Hans": "整词映射：abandon ↔ 放 fàng。先按 LET GO／RELEASE 选择“放”，再比较声音。CNRTL 记法语词史中约1100年的松开缰绳义；汉语“放”另有独立的释放义证据。这是限定语义的历时联系，不表示单字“放”可翻译 abandon 的所有现代用法。"
        },
        "consonant_comparison": {
          "source_segment": "medial /b/ after /ə/ in abandon",
          "target_segment": "initial f /f/ in fàng",
          "label": "b ↔ f · b-p-m-f Candidate group",
          "predicted_group": "b-p-m-f",
          "group_fit": "Within proposed group; not a sound law",
          "phonetic_evidence_status": "Modern pronunciation comparison; no historical sound correspondence established",
          "note": {
            "en": "Compare the /b/ after initial /ə/ in English abandon with Mandarin f /f/ in fàng: b ↔ f falls within the proposed b-p-m-f group. This is a medial-to-initial segment comparison, not whole-word homophony; voicing, place/manner, remaining segments and tone differ. Group membership does not prove a sound law or historical relation.",
            "zh-Hans": "比较英语 abandon 起始 /ə/ 后的 /b/ 与普通话 fàng 的 f /f/：b ↔ f 落入候选 b-p-m-f 组。这是词中到词首的片段比较，不是整词同音；清浊、发音部位／方式、其余音段及声调存在差异。同组不证明音变规律或历史关系。"
          }
        },
        "scores": {
          "semantic_fit_let_go_release": "High",
          "semantic_fit_all_modern_abandon_senses": "Limited / context-dependent",
          "consonant_group_fit": "Within proposed group",
          "overall_confidence": "Low",
          "scale": "Editorial categories; no experimental measurement"
        },
        "source_refs": [
          "REF-CNRTL-ABANDONNER",
          "REF-ZDIC-FANG",
          "REF-MW-ABANDON"
        ]
      }
    ],
    "independent_observations": {
      "en": "abash ↔ 怕 pà (medial b ↔ p) and bash ↔ 拍 pāi (initial b ↔ p) are two other separately identified Candidate observations. Sharing b-p-m-f does not make them prove each other or bandon ↔ 办. Statistical independence requires etymological-family review; count related derivatives once.",
      "zh-Hans": "abash ↔ 怕 pà（词中 b ↔ p）与 bash ↔ 拍 pāi（词首 b ↔ p）是另外两个分别记录的 Candidate 观察。共享 b-p-m-f 不使它们互相证明，也不证明 bandon ↔ 办；统计独立性仍需词源家族核验，同源派生须去重。"
    },
    "dialect_diachronic_chinese_evidence": {
      "status": "Separate evidence track / pending",
      "note": {
        "en": "Dialect & Diachronic Chinese Evidence is a separate evidence track. Record dialect/location/date and transcription separately from Middle Chinese or Old Chinese reconstructions, with named sources and reconstruction systems. Modern dialects are not frozen copies of ancient Chinese. No dialect or reconstructed pronunciation is used to raise this candidate’s grade; these comparisons remain pending.",
        "zh-Hans": "Dialect & Diachronic Chinese Evidence｜汉语方言与历时音韵证据独立记录。方言须注明地点、年代与转写；中古音／上古音须注明来源与重构体系，不能混用。现代方言不是古汉语的冻结复制品。本候选未以方言或重构音提高等级，相关比较待核验。"
      },
      "items": []
    },
    "correction": {
      "en": "The earlier Chinese same-group path design was an implementation error and has been withdrawn. Its path scores and planned path-constraint experiment are superseded, not evidence against the author’s cross-language hypothesis. This is retrospective editorial review, not a blinded study; no experiment has run.",
      "zh-Hans": "此前要求汉语全链同组的设计属于实现误解，已撤下；相应路径评分与路径约束实验计划作废，不构成对作者跨语言假说的反证。本次为回顾性编辑核验，不是盲评，未运行实验。"
    }
  },
  "legacy_migration": {
    "version": "0.1",
    "baseline_commit": "5ed87f6b6d2aa99523368bd26aa4c7d43b8deb3b",
    "scope": "Read-only Research archive of the pre-migration stage shape. Original assessments and author material elsewhere in this record are unchanged. Not a second active model.",
    "previous_diachronic_semantic_mapping": {
      "version": "2.0",
      "status": "Historical semantic analysis; independent of consonant groups",
      "historical_path": "BANDON → À BANDON → ABANDONNER → ABANDON",
      "semantic_path": "POWER / AUTHORITY → DISPOSAL → GIVE OVER → LET GO → GIVE UP",
      "historical_stages": [
        {
          "stage_id": "bandon",
          "form": "BANDON",
          "language": "Old French",
          "meaning": "POWER / AUTHORITY / CONTROL",
          "note": {
            "en": "CNRTL identifies bandon as power/authority. Do not assign RELEASE to this root.",
            "zh-Hans": "CNRTL 将 bandon 释为权力／支配；不能把 RELEASE 赋给此词根。"
          },
          "source_refs": [
            "REF-CNRTL-ABANDON"
          ]
        },
        {
          "stage_id": "a-bandon",
          "form": "À BANDON",
          "language": "Old French phrase",
          "meaning": "at someone’s power/disposal — DISPOSAL RELATION",
          "note": {
            "en": "The phrase places something at another’s disposal; this is a relation of authority, not simply the act of handling it. Old French a bandon and Anglo-French a bandun are source forms; À is a normalized display.",
            "zh-Hans": "短语表示将某物置于他人支配／任其处置的关系，不只是处理动作。古法语 a bandon、盎格鲁法语 a bandun 为来源形式；À 为规范化展示。"
          },
          "source_refs": [
            "REF-CNRTL-ABANDON",
            "REF-MW-ABANDON"
          ]
        },
        {
          "stage_id": "abandonner",
          "form": "ABANDONNER",
          "language": "Old French → French",
          "meaning": "GIVE OVER / leave to another’s disposal; RELEASE / LET GO; LEAVE",
          "note": {
            "en": "The display abbreviates a family including the noun abandon/abandun. CNRTL derives the verb from abandon and records release of a rein around 1100 and leaving entirely from the 12th century. These overlapping senses prevent treating TRANSFER then RELEASE as a proven chronological ladder.",
            "zh-Hans": "展示缩略了包含名词 abandon/abandun 的词族。CNRTL 将动词分析为由 abandon 派生，记约1100年的松开缰绳义及12世纪起的完全离开义；义项重叠，不能把 TRANSFER 再 RELEASE 当成已证年代阶梯。"
          },
          "source_refs": [
            "REF-CNRTL-ABANDONNER",
            "REF-CNRTL-ABANDON"
          ]
        },
        {
          "stage_id": "english-abandon",
          "form": "ABANDON",
          "language": "Middle English → English verb",
          "meaning": "GIVE UP / LEAVE / DESERT",
          "note": {
            "en": "Middle English abandounen, attested in the 14th century, was borrowed through Anglo-French abanduner. Modern meanings include relinquishing an interest and withdrawing support. The later English noun is separate.",
            "zh-Hans": "中古英语 abandounen 见于14世纪，经盎格鲁法语 abanduner 借入。现代义含放弃权益、离开与撤去支持；后来的英语名词另论。"
          },
          "source_refs": [
            "REF-MW-ABANDON"
          ]
        }
      ],
      "boundary": {
        "en": "Historical meanings and attested forms remain separated. The arrows summarize semantic development, not five strictly successive first-attestation dates. No Chinese same-group path is inferred.",
        "zh-Hans": "历史词形与义项保留边界；箭头概括语义发展，不是五个严格递进的首见年代，不推导汉语同组路径。"
      }
    }
  }
}