Post History
How did meaning 1 beneath semantically shift to 2? How does seeing or sight 🡲 semantically appertain to wit or knowledge? viz. 1530s, abbreviation of videlicet [2.] "that is to say, to wit, nam...
#5: Post edited
videlicet : How did 'it's permissible to see' semantically shift to signify 'to wit, namely'?
- How did 'videlicet' (it's permissible to see) semantically shift 🢂 to signify 'to wit, namely'?
How did meaning 1 beneath semantically shift to 2? How does *seeing or sight* ⟶ semantically appertain to ***wit or knowledge***?- >## [viz.](https://www.etymonline.com/word/viz.?ref=etymonline_crossreference)
- >
- > 1530s, abbreviation of videlicet **[2.]** "that is to say, to wit, namely" (mid-15c.),
- from Latin _videlicet_, contraction of _videre licet_ **[1.]** "it is permissible to see,"
- from _videre_ "to see" (see [vision](https://www.etymonline.com/word/vision?ref=etymonline_crossreference)) + _licet_ "it is allowed," third person singular present indicative of _licere_ "be allowed" (see [licence](https://www.etymonline.com/word/licence?ref=etymonline_crossreference)).
- The -z- is not a letter, but originally a twirl, representing the usual Medieval Latin shorthand symbol for the ending -et. "In reading aloud usually rendered by 'namely.' " [OED]
- </section>
- How did meaning 1 beneath semantically shift to 2? How does *seeing or sight* 🡲 semantically appertain to ***wit or knowledge***?
- >## [viz.](https://www.etymonline.com/word/viz.?ref=etymonline_crossreference)
- >
- > 1530s, abbreviation of videlicet **[2.]** "that is to say, to wit, namely" (mid-15c.),
- from Latin _videlicet_, contraction of _videre licet_ **[1.]** "it is permissible to see,"
- from _videre_ "to see" (see [vision](https://www.etymonline.com/word/vision?ref=etymonline_crossreference)) + _licet_ "it is allowed," third person singular present indicative of _licere_ "be allowed" (see [licence](https://www.etymonline.com/word/licence?ref=etymonline_crossreference)).
- The -z- is not a letter, but originally a twirl, representing the usual Medieval Latin shorthand symbol for the ending -et. "In reading aloud usually rendered by 'namely.' " [OED]
- </section>
#4: Post edited
'videlicet': How did “it is permissible to see” semantically shift to signify “to wit, namely”?
- videlicet : How did 'it's permissible to see' semantically shift to signify 'to wit, namely'?
#3: Post edited
How did signification 1 beneath semantically shift to 2? [Etymonline](https://www.etymonline.com/word/viz.?ref=etymonline_crossreference):>### viz.- >
- > 1530s, abbreviation of videlicet **[2.]** "that is to say, to wit, namely" (mid-15c.),
- from Latin _videlicet_, contraction of _videre licet_ **[1.]** "it is permissible to see,"
- from _videre_ "to see" (see [vision](https://www.etymonline.com/word/vision?ref=etymonline_crossreference)) + _licet_ "it is allowed," third person singular present indicative of _licere_ "be allowed" (see [licence](https://www.etymonline.com/word/licence?ref=etymonline_crossreference)).
- The -z- is not a letter, but originally a twirl, representing the usual Medieval Latin shorthand symbol for the ending -et. "In reading aloud usually rendered by 'namely.' " [OED]
- </section>
- How did meaning 1 beneath semantically shift to 2? How does *seeing or sight* ⟶ semantically appertain to ***wit or knowledge***?
- >## [viz.](https://www.etymonline.com/word/viz.?ref=etymonline_crossreference)
- >
- > 1530s, abbreviation of videlicet **[2.]** "that is to say, to wit, namely" (mid-15c.),
- from Latin _videlicet_, contraction of _videre licet_ **[1.]** "it is permissible to see,"
- from _videre_ "to see" (see [vision](https://www.etymonline.com/word/vision?ref=etymonline_crossreference)) + _licet_ "it is allowed," third person singular present indicative of _licere_ "be allowed" (see [licence](https://www.etymonline.com/word/licence?ref=etymonline_crossreference)).
- The -z- is not a letter, but originally a twirl, representing the usual Medieval Latin shorthand symbol for the ending -et. "In reading aloud usually rendered by 'namely.' " [OED]
- </section>
#2: Post edited
'videlicet': How did “it is permissible to see” semantically shift to signify “that is to say”?
- 'videlicet': How did “it is permissible to see” semantically shift to signify “to wit, namely”?
#1: Initial revision
'videlicet': How did “it is permissible to see” semantically shift to signify “that is to say”?
How did signification 1 beneath semantically shift to 2? [Etymonline](https://www.etymonline.com/word/viz.?ref=etymonline_crossreference): >### viz. > > 1530s, abbreviation of videlicet **[2.]** "that is to say, to wit, namely" (mid-15c.), from Latin _videlicet_, contraction of _videre licet_ **[1.]** "it is permissible to see," from _videre_ "to see" (see [vision](https://www.etymonline.com/word/vision?ref=etymonline_crossreference)) + _licet_ "it is allowed," third person singular present indicative of _licere_ "be allowed" (see [licence](https://www.etymonline.com/word/licence?ref=etymonline_crossreference)). The -z- is not a letter, but originally a twirl, representing the usual Medieval Latin shorthand symbol for the ending -et. "In reading aloud usually rendered by 'namely.' " [OED] </section>