Comments on How did in- + partire compound to mean "communicate as knowledge of information" (impart)?
Post
How did in- + partire compound to mean "communicate as knowledge of information" (impart)?
What semantic notions underlie in- + partire 🡺 with "communicate as knowledge or information"?
This semantic shift flummoxes me, because in- + partire "was not originally restricted to immaterial things but now usually is only in reference to qualities". Undeniably, communication can't be physically divided or parted! Moreover, once you divide or part the original communication, you've doctored or mangled the original communication! Then if you communicate merely a DIVISION or PART of the communication, then you are MIScommunicating, because you aren't communicating the original whole communication!
impart (v.) [on Etymonline].
early 15c., "to give a part of (one's possessions);" late 15c., "to share, take part in,"
from Old French empartir, impartir "assign, allot, allocate, share out" (14c.),
from Late Latin impartire (also impertire) "to share in, divide with another; communicate,"
from assimilated form of in- "into, in" (from PIE root *en "in")
+ partire "to divide, part" (from pars "a part, piece, a share,"
from PIE root *pere- (2) "to grant, allot").Meaning "communicate as knowledge or information" is from 1540s; the word
was not originally restricted to immaterial things but now usually is only in reference to qualities.
5 comment threads