Editing Toe (section)

==History==

===Etymology===

==== {{Transliteration|ang|Tā}} ====
The [[Old English]] term for ''toe'' is {{Transliteration|ang|tā}} (plural {{Transliteration|ang|tān}}). This is a contraction of {{Transliteration|ang|tāhe}}, and derives from Proto-Germanic {{Lang|gem-x-proto|*taihwǭ}} (cognates: Old Norse {{Transliteration|non|tá}}, Old Frisian {{Transliteration|ofs|tāne}}, Middle Dutch {{Lang|dum|tee}}, Dutch {{Lang|nl|teen}} (perhaps originally a plural), Old High German {{Lang|goh|zēha}}, German {{Lang|de|Zehe}}), perhaps originally meaning 'fingers' as well (many [[Indo-European language]]s use one word to mean both 'fingers' and 'toes', e.g. ''digit''), and thus from PIE root {{Lang|ine-x-proto|*deyḱ-}} &mdash; 'to show'.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://etymonline.com |title=Online Etymology Dictionary |at=[http://etymonline.com/index.php?allowed_in_frame=0&search=toe&searchmode=none Toe]}}</ref>

===={{Lang|la|Hallux}}====
[[File:PaluchUStopy.jpg|thumb|The big toe of a human]]

In classical Latin, {{Lang|la|hallex}},<ref name="Hyrtl1880">Hyrtl, J. (1880). ''Onomatologia Anatomica. Geschichte und Kritik der anatomischen Sprache der Gegenwart.'' Wien: Wilhelm Braumüller. K.K. Hof- und Universitätsbuchhändler. p. 248–249. [https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/69009#page/270/mode/1up online] at Biodiversity Library.</ref><ref name="Triepel1908">Triepel, H. (1908). Memorial on the anatomical nomenclature of the anatomical society. In A. Rose (Ed.), ''Medical Greek. Collection of papers on medical onomatology and a grammatical guide to learn modern Greek'' (pp. 176–93). New York: Peri Hellados publication office.</ref> {{Lang|la|allex}},<ref name="Hyrtl1880" /><ref name="Lewis & Short">Lewis, C.T. & Short, C. (1879). ''A Latin dictionary founded on Andrews' edition of Freund's Latin dictionary.'' Oxford: Clarendon Press.</ref> {{Lang|la|hallus}}<ref name="Hyrtl1880" /> and {{Lang|la|allus}},<ref name="Hyrtl1880" /> with genitive {{Lang|la|(h)allicis}} and {{Lang|la|(h)alli}}, are used to refer to the big toe. The form {{Lang|la|hallux}} (genitive, {{Lang|la|hallucis}}) currently in use is however a [[blend word]] of the aforementioned forms.<ref name="Hyrtl1880"/><ref name="Triepel1910b">Triepel, H. (1910). ''Die anatomischen Namen. Ihre Ableitung und Aussprache. Mit einem Anhang: Biographische Notizen.''(Dritte Auflage). Wiesbaden: Verlag J.F. Bergmann.</ref> Compare [[wikt:pollex|''pollex'']], the equivalent term for the [[thumb]].

=== Evolution ===
[[Ernst Haeckel |Haeckel]] traces the standard [[vertebrate]] five-toed schema from [[fish fin]]s via [[amphibian]] ancestors.<ref>
{{cite book
 | last1 = Haeckel
 | first1 = Ernst Heinrich Philipp August
 | author-link1 = Ernst Haeckel
 | year = 1874
 | title = The Evolution of Man
 | url = https://books.google.com/books?id=Vu8X-Pe-dMoC
 | series = Library of Alexandria
 | volume = 1
 | publisher = Library of Alexandria
 | publication-date = 1923
 | isbn = 9781465548931
 | access-date = 31 August 2019
 | quote = The thorough investigations of Gegenbaur have shown that the fish's fins [...] are many-toed feet. The various cartilaginous or bony radii that are found in large numbers in each fin correspond to the fingers of toes of the higher Vertebrates. The several joints of each fin-radius correspond to the various parts of the toe. Even in the Dipneusta the fin is of the same construction as in the fishes; it was afterwards gradually evolved into the five-toed form, which we first encounter in the Amphibia. The reduction of the number of toes to six, and then to five, probably took place in the second half of the Devonian period - at the latest, in the subsequent Carboniferous period - in those Dipneusta which we regard as the ancestors of the Amphibia. [...] The fact that the toes number five is of great importance, because they have clearly been transmitted from the Amphibia to all the higher Vertebrates. Man entirely resembles his amphibian ancestors in this respect, and indeed in the whole structure of the bony skeleton of his five-toed extremities. A careful comparison of the skeleton of the frog with our own is enough to show this. [...] There is absolutely no reason why there should be five toes in the fore and hind feet in the lowest Amphibia, the reptiles, and the higher Vertebrates, unless we ascribe it to inheritance from a common stem-form. Heredity alone can explain it. It is true that we find less than five toes in many of the Amphibia and of the higher Vertebrates. But in all these cases we can prove that some of the toes atrophied, and were in time lost altogether.
}}
</ref>