Комментарии:EAS 97, KW 130, Poppe 53, 105, Цинциус 1972a, 49-52, Дыбо 6. A Western isogloss. Despite Щербак 1997, 114, Mong. is hardly borrowed from Turk. Doerfer's (TMN 2, 177-178) doubts in the validity of the etymology are hardly grounded: all forms are easily explained if we suppose a protoform like *edije. The form can be in fact an old derivative of *ĕda 'thing, household' (q. v., cf. Poppe UJb XIII, 114, 120).
