I had cause to look up the etymology of 'kettle' the other day (the cause being that Olivia asked me what the etymology of 'kettle' was). My intuitive guess was that it was more Old English than Latinate or Greek, and while that didn't turn out to be too far off, the answer is actually much more interesting.
From Wiktionary:
From Middle English _ketel_, also _chetel_, from Old Norse _ketill_ and Old English _ċietel_ (“kettle, cauldron”), both from Proto-Germanic *katilaz (“kettle, bucket, vessel”), of uncertain origin and formation. Usually regarded as a borrowing of Late Latin catīllus (“small bowl”), diminutive of Latin catinus (“deep bowl, vessel for cooking up or serving food”), however, the word may be Germanic confused with the Latin: compare Old High German chezzi (“a kettle, dish, bowl”), Old English _cete_ (“cooking pot”), Icelandic kati, ketla (“a small boat”). Cognate with West Frisian _tsjettel_ (“kettle”), Dutch ketel (“kettle”), German Kessel (“kettle”), Swedish kittel (“cauldron”), Swedish kittel (“kettle”), Gothic 𐌺𐌰𐍄𐌹𐌻𐍃 (katils, “kettle”), Finnish kattila. Compare also Russian котёл (kotjól, “boiler, cauldron”).
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/kettle
The key information there is that first sentence: 'From Middle English ketel, also chetel, from Old Norse ketill and Old English ċietel (“kettle, cauldron”), both from Proto-Germanic katilaz (“kettle, bucket, vessel”), of uncertain origin and formation.' Contrary to my guess, there is* a possible Latinate component, but it sounds like that's disputed/possibly a namespace collision/something that had an influence on an existing word rather than stemming directly from there.
All the sources I've looked up have repeated the Latin angle, though I wonder how 'strong' that is, given that it seems to always be couched in terms of 'it is usually consider to come from...'.
Pure speculation, but I like the idea: what if there are just lots of similar words for 'kettle' in different language that sprung up separately? It's slightly more plausible than it might sound. 'Mama' and 'papa', or slight variants thereof, are really, really common terms for 'mother' and 'father' in a bunch of different languages. They're false cognates (i.e. words that appear to share an etymology or have influenced one another's development, but which in fact have evolved separately) -- because they're just really basic sounds that babies tend to make early on, and which therefore people have assigned those referents to.
'Kettle' is hardly such a foundational concept as a parent, although [insert joke about British people's love for tea here]. But, kettle means, in a more expansive sense, a cooking vessel -- often the words that it stems from meant 'cauldron' or something similar. Very basic forms of cooking vessel.
The 'mama' and 'papa' thing stems from early language acquistion in infants, but also presumably in people as a species, since we assigned the referents to those sounds. The brain development that makes us Homo sapiens is fundamentally bound up in cooking. Cooking food yields more energy from the same items and also broadens the supply of things you can consider edible. This fundamental technology freed up excess energy, which fed into cognitive development. We think, because we cook.
(Related fun fact: a big reason human childbirth is so, uh, dicey and the reason our babies are so useless compared even to the more altricial animal species is because... our brains and heads got so big proportional to the rest of our physiology. We ('we' I say) bake 'em as long as we can, but they just can't spent that long inside our bodies relative to the rest of our development.)
So, I can imagine a version of events where 'kettle' gets assigned a fairly primal word that appears as a false cognate.
Imagine, I stress, because this is definitely pure speculation -- the excuse to throw together some interesting ideas around evolution, etymology, and technology. It is almost definitely: not actually the case.