Hungarian Historical Phonology vág
vág 'schneiden; hacken, spalten; hauen, fällen (Baum); schlachten, (ab)stechen'
First attestation/Old Hungarian data
1320 Fridmanvagasa, placename (EWUng)
Important dialectal forms
[coming]
Uralic/Ugric/Pre-Hungarian reconstruction
(Disputed:)
UEW: PU *waŋɜ-, waŋkɜ- 'strike, cut; schlagen, schneiden'
MSzFE: PU *waŋɜ- or PUg *waŋkɜ-
Status of the Ugric etymology
Unclear
Loan etymology
None suggested
Cognates suggested in earlier research
Khanty: East (V) waγ-, South (DN) waŋχ-, North (O) waŋ- 'behauen' < PKh *wāŋk-
Mansi: Mansi (TJ) waŋk-, East (KM) woŋk-, West (P) woŋk- 'schlagen' < PMs *wāŋk-
Proto-Ob-Ugric: ?
Udmurt: vand- 'schneiden, abschneiden, zuschneiden, abstechen (ein Tier), schlachten'
Komi: vundi̮- 'schneiden'
Commentary
UEW lists the Ugric word under a Proto-Finno-Ugric reconstruction, but it is impossible to derive the alleged Permic cognates from the same source as the Ugric ones (both the consonantism and the vocalism are completely irregular). Also the correspondence between Komi and Udmurt vocalism is irregular, as noted by MSzFE. In MSzFE and EWUng the Permic cognates are marked with a question mark. Abondolo (1996: 85) notes that the internal relations between the Permic cognates are remarked already by KESK, which doubts the Finno-ugric etymology. Because of this, Abondolo assumes the word-family is limited to Ugric.
The correspondence Proto-Khanty *ā ~ Proto-Mansi *ā does not regularly fit the system described by Zhivlov (2014: 124): this is not a regular correspondence in the case of any Uralic back-vowel. Honti (1982: 195) reconstructs Proto-Ob-Ugric *wāŋk-.
Conclusion
The Ugric words are probably connected somehow, but the vowel-correspondences between the Ob-Ugric words are not regular, which makes it impossible to reconstruct a Proto-Ugric word.
References
Abondolo 1996: 85: PUg, not PFU
EWUng: 1595, s.v. vág: PUg or PFU
Honti 1982: 195, No. 698: Proto-Ob-Ugric
MSzFE: 665-666, s.v. vág: PUg or PU
UEW: s.v. waŋɜ-, waŋkɜ-: PFU Uralonet