@avzaagzonunaada @aryaman2020 I checked the history and it seems to be Hölderlin2019. Prior to his edit it had only "मासैः (māsaiḥ)." Perhaps his algorithm is faulty. This was also the person (or bot?) responsible for this if I remember correctly.
@avzaagzonunaada @aryaman2020 That mess has been mostly cleaned up, but it's still listed as a single root द्यु and listed as "masculine." द्यु here derives from दिव् as per the rule दिव उत् & both "दिव्" and "द्यो" are considered feminine. Masculine द्युः means fire (unlike feminine द्यौः, which means sky).
@avzaagzonunaada @aryaman2020 Abhidhana Chintamani lists them as two separate stems (so द्यावः, द्याम्, etc. from द्यो & दिवः, दिवम्, etc. from दिव्). Vachaspatyam lists दिव् and द्यो as feminine. Amarakosha mentions them as separate stems and also states that they are feminine (द्यो-दिवौ द्वे स्त्रियाम्)
@avzaagzonunaada @aryaman2020 I thought that perhaps Hölderlin2019 was a bot since his "userpage" (if you can call it that) seems to be in disarray. But going through his discussion page, it seems he's a real human being who has had arguments with another user called Bhagadatta. Perhaps he's just eccentric?
Loading suggestions...