Author Topic: The random etymology of the day (Read 237912 times)

Icarus · « **Reply #100 on:** January 23, 2006, 12:29:51 PM »

Have you done a post yet on the history of the word "ass"?

Because I'd be curious.

Brinestone · « **Reply #101 on:** January 23, 2006, 12:32:55 PM »

Actually, now that you mention it, I would be too.

Ela · « **Reply #102 on:** January 23, 2006, 02:07:20 PM »

Quote

In 1999 I was a nerd.

Me, too. :devil:

Jonathon · « **Reply #103 on:** January 23, 2006, 03:49:32 PM »

That one's probably a lot more straightforward than you think.

From Etymonline:

Quote

Slang for "backside," first attested 1860 in nautical slang, in popular use from 1930; from Amer.Eng. pronunciation of arse (q.v.). The loss of -r- before -s- attested in several other words (e.g. burst/bust, curse/cuss, horse/hoss, barse/bass). Indirect evidence of the change from arse to ass can be traced to 1785 (in euphemistic avoidance of ass "donkey" by polite speakers) and perhaps to Shakespeare, if Nick Bottom transformed into a donkey in "A Midsummer Night's Dream" (1594) is the word-play some think it is.

Icarus · « **Reply #104 on:** January 24, 2006, 03:53:31 PM »

I'm confused by that, actually. I'm trying to figure out how it came to mean both donkey and posterior, and which came first.

Jonathon · « **Reply #105 on:** January 24, 2006, 04:21:21 PM »

Ass meant "donkey." Arse meant "posterior." But then arse came to be pronounced like ass, so ass came to mean both "donkey" and "posterior."

Icarus · « **Reply #106 on:** January 24, 2006, 05:11:44 PM »

Ah. Thanks.

Jonathon · « **Reply #107 on:** January 24, 2006, 07:12:38 PM »

No problem. I guess I didn't mention that they started as two separate words. It's kind of interesting how the senses have sort of meshed, though.

Jonathon · « **Reply #108 on:** January 26, 2006, 03:24:37 PM »

I think I might have done this one at some point in the past, but I still like it.

fellowship, n.

from FELLOW + SHIP

fellow, n.

Old English feolaga 'partner,' from Old Norse felagi, from fe 'money' (cognate with fee) + verbal base denoting "lay." Sense is of "one who puts down money with another in a joint venture." Used familiarly since Middle English for "man, male person," but not etymologically masculine.

fee, n.

From common Proto-Germanic fehu 'cattle, property, money,' from Proto-Indo-European peku, whence Latin pecu 'cattle,' pecuniary 'money.'

(The current English word fee actually comes from Frankish through French. The original English word became obsolete.)

-ship, suffix

Old English -sciepe, 'state, condition of being,' from Proto-Germanic *-skapaz, from base *skap- 'to create, ordain, appoint.' Cognate with Old English gesceape 'to shape.'

pooka · « **Reply #109 on:** January 27, 2006, 12:18:27 PM »

Is it okay to link to the Hatrack writer's workshop here? We talked about asses for a long time and nothing as clear as what you mention (which makes sense but sense often has nothing to do with historical linguistics) emerged.

Quote

Q: Why is arse spelled as it is? It is just like gaol and colour in being an alternate spelling in American english? Is that how they spell the synonym for donkey?

A: Arse is your bum. But properly speaking, it refers to an animal's bum (usually a cow or horse).

So when someone says kiss my ass, they are implying their bum is like the rear-end of a cow.

However in Australia, where I am, the 'R' is never pronounced the word sounds more like 'uss'.

An 'ass' is a donkey, it is pronounced with a hard 'A' just like in the US. Don't be tempted, when affecting a British accent for whatever reason, to ask someone to 'take a ride on your arse', it won't mean what you hope it means.

There was another reply in which the responder didn't get that "arse" isn't even a word in American English.

Now that I'm rereading things, I think I get that you did say what they said. I think.

Jonathon · « **Reply #110 on:** January 27, 2006, 12:41:26 PM »

I don't see why it wouldn't be okay to link to the Hatrack Writers' Workshop.

And in my opinion, historical linguistics just requires a different kind of sense from what most people are used to.

Jonathon · « **Reply #111 on:** January 31, 2006, 12:00:16 PM »

So does anyone have any requests? I'm sure there are words whose etymologies people want to know that haven't occured to me.

Porter · « **Reply #112 on:** January 31, 2006, 12:09:45 PM »

I know you said that they are almost impossible to trace, but I really wish I knew the origins of more phrases.

pooka · « **Reply #113 on:** February 01, 2006, 09:47:05 PM »

I thought of a good one earlier today but now I have forgotten it.

Jonathon · « **Reply #114 on:** February 01, 2006, 09:51:32 PM »

So had I.

Porter · « **Reply #115 on:** February 01, 2006, 10:21:46 PM »

I find it bizarre that the only Enlish word for "egg" is Scandanavian in origin.

I mean, it's not bizarre that we have some Scandanavian words, but why don't we have any romantic or germanic words that mean the same thing?

Jonathon · « **Reply #116 on:** February 01, 2006, 10:47:49 PM »

Scandinavian is Germanic. We did, however, have an English word. It just became displaced by the Scandinavian one as more and more people moved from northern England (where the Scandinavian influence was strongest) to southern England.

There's actually an oft-quoted passage by William Caxton that deals with precisely this usage issue. Here it is in modern English:

Quote

And certainly our language now used varies far from that which was used and spoken when I was born. For we Englishmen have been born under the domination of the Moon, which is never steadfast but ever wavering, waxing one season, and wanes and decreases another season. And that common English that is spoken in one shire varies from another. In so much that in my days happened that certain merchants were in a ship in Thames, for to have sailed over the sea into Zelande (Holland), and for lack of wind they tarried at Forlond, and went to land for to refresh them; And one of them named Sheffield, a merchant, came in to an house and asked for meat; and specially he asked after eggs; And the good wife answered, that she could not speak no French. And the merchant was angry, for he also could speak no French, but would have had eggs, and she understood him not. And then at last another said that he would have eyren: then the good wife said that she understood him well. Lo, what should a man in these days now write, "eggs" or "eyren"? Certainly it is hard to please everyman because of diversity and change of language.

So basically the form "egg" and "eggs" sounded like a foreign language to someone from southern England, so the woman assumed the guy must be speaking French. People in that area still used the native English forms "eye" and "eyren."

Brinestone · « **Reply #117 on:** February 02, 2006, 07:22:23 AM »

I'm often intrigued by homonyms (is that the word I'm looking for?) that don't seem to be semantically related, like interest in the sense of mental engagement and interest in the money sense. What did the word originally mean, and how did it come to have such different meanings attached to it?

rivka · « **Reply #118 on:** February 02, 2006, 07:27:20 AM »

I think those are homographs.

Don't homonyms generally have different spellings?

Porter · « **Reply #119 on:** February 02, 2006, 07:50:51 AM »

I don't know what they really mean, but looking at the words, I would assume that homographs are two words that are spelled the same (same writing), while homonyms are two words that are spelled the same and pronounced the same (same name).

Of course, what words look like they should doesn't mean much.

rivka · « **Reply #120 on:** February 02, 2006, 07:58:12 AM »

homograph
homophone
homonym

Looks like I was wrong, and homonym can refer either to a homograph or a homophone.

Porter · « **Reply #121 on:** February 02, 2006, 08:03:39 AM »

That makes sense too.

pooka · « **Reply #122 on:** February 02, 2006, 08:07:12 AM »

I'm very interested in interest.

Jonathon · « **Reply #123 on:** February 02, 2006, 12:32:51 PM »

Aha. Apparently they stem from the same word, and it's not as big of a stretch as one might think. The OED lists the original English meaning as "The relation of being objectively concerned in something, by having a right or title to, a claim upon, or a share in. a. The fact or relation of being legally concerned; legal concern in a thing; esp. right or title to property, or to some of the uses or benefits pertaining to property." From there it came to mean "compensation for injury [caused by the use of one's property]." Then it specified to mean "money paid for the use of money lent."

The other sense is simply a watered-down version of the original sense of being concerned with something.

Brinestone · « **Reply #124 on:** February 02, 2006, 12:51:08 PM »

Thanks! I knew it had to be something like that, but I wasn't sure of the specifics.