As for your Q, I think Persian =am and Japanese =mo are similar but the exact pragmatic details seem a bit different . Also, I don't think mi-khor-am=am can exist. Ch 4 in the linked book claims that =am can't cliticise to finite verbs (I think this is true for =mo too?).

lib.ysu.am/disciplines_...

In Persian خوردن is ‘consume’ in general, آب خوردن is ‘to drink water’. It's also used as a light verb, as so many Persian verbs are, so my guess is that دارو خوردن is a sort-of lexicalised complex predicate.

My preferred approach is simply to ignore Ethnologue and use Glottolog instead. It's not ideal for the field to be treating an American missionary organisation as a load-bearing part of the basic infrastructure, and I don't think it's necessary.

Afaik that's how it's taught too, or at least that's how I was taught

Thank you! My (belated) wishes to you as well!

That has a very different sound to me because ɾɘnɖi is Hindi for ‘wh**e’ 😬

The worst imo is when journalists write “researchers from XYZ(famous) university say this”.

😲 plus the resumptive proforms too

The semantics of it may have changed but the etymon *bayt itself is pretty solidly PSemitic, no?

Aha, I see. Thanks!

Now that I think about it, the English word 'hell' itself probably underwent something similar, as the older polytheist understanding of an underworld was replaced by the Christian one.

Černy says ⲁⲙⲛⲧⲉ 'hell' comes from ı ͗mntt 'the west'. How true is that, and how might 'west' have come to be used in the sense of the Christian hell?

The real linguistics is the fun with words we have along the way