Hungarian Historical Phonology szűz
szűz 'virgin; (Old Hu) clean'
First attestation/Old Hungarian data
[coming]
Important dialectal forms
[coming]
Uralic/Ugric/Pre-Hungarian reconstruction
(Disputed:)
UEW: PFU *sićɜ (süćɜ) 'clean; rein'
Loan etymology
1. Hu ← Iir *ćwaita-, > OI śvéta- 'weiß, licht' (Katz 2003: 85)
2. Hu ← West Old Turkic *süzi- < *süz- 'strain, cleanse, purify' (WOT: 459-464)
Cognates suggested in earlier research
UEW:
Mansi: East (KM) śɔ̈̄ś 'Sohn, Junge beim Anreden', West (LM) śė̄ś 'Jungfer', śė̄ś oåj 'Jungfer'
Komi: (S) se̮ʒ́ 'klar nicht trübe, rein'
Udmurt: śuӡ̌́al- 'reinigen, putzen'
Commentary
The Hungarian word has several competing etymologies, none of which is very concinving. The Uralic (Finno-Ugric) etymology listed in the UEW includes both semantic and severe phonological problems. Honti (2017) assumes that all the meanings can be derived from 'clean, clear'; this might be possible, but the phonological problems remain. Honti assumes various kinds of assimilations, but it is more probable that we are not dealing with an inherited word here, as there are no convincing examples of Hungarian z reflecting earlier *ć, and also the vocalism is difficult to explain.
WOT and Róna-Tas (2017) consider the Turkic etymology a possible alternative to the Finno-Ugric etymology; Róna-Tas (2017) considers the Turkic etymology more likely due to Honti's arguments regarding assimilation and semantic developments. Honti criticizes the Turkic etymology for its hypothetical nature (no suitable source form is attested).
It can be argued that as the unattested form (from an attested Turkic root) is the only problem with the Turkic loan etymology, it is much less problematic than the completely irregular Uralic/Finno-Ugric etymology.
Conclusion
The inherited Uralic/Finno-Ugric etymology is completely irregular. The Turkic etymology requires additional research.
References
Honti 2017: 59–62
Katz 2003: 85: Hu ← IIr
Róna-Tas 2017: PFU or ← ? Turkic
UEW s.v. sićɜ (süćɜ): ? PFU Uralonet
WOT: 833–836: ← ? Turkic