Activity for PSTH
| Type | On... | Excerpt | Status | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Edit | Post #286064 |
Post edited: |
— | 28 days ago |
| Edit | Post #286064 |
Post edited: |
— | 28 days ago |
| Edit | Post #286127 |
Post edited: |
— | 2 months ago |
| Edit | Post #286127 | Initial revision | — | 2 months ago |
| Question | — |
Why did linguists impute Proto-Italic *moini-, *moinos- "duty, obligation, task" — to PIE root *mei- (1) "to change, go, move"? What semantic notions underlie Proto-Italic moini-, moinos- "duty, obligation, task," — with PIE root mei- (1) "to change, go, move"? Semantically, they feel unrelated! I quote from merely one para. on Etymonline for municipal (adj.). >The first element is from munus (plural munia) "service p... (more) |
— | 2 months ago |
| Edit | Post #286063 |
Post edited: |
— | 2 months ago |
| Edit | Post #286119 |
Post edited: |
— | 2 months ago |
| Edit | Post #286119 |
Post edited: |
— | 2 months ago |
| Edit | Post #286119 |
Post edited: |
— | 2 months ago |
| Edit | Post #286119 | Initial revision | — | 2 months ago |
| Question | — |
How did prae + scribere semantically shift from meaning "write before" ⟶ "a title or right acquired through long use or uninterrupted possession"? I grok that prae- + scribere ⟶ praescribere literally meant write before. But what semantic notions underlie write before with `a title or right acquired through long use or uninterrupted possession`? These notions contradict each other — because if you possessed writing before acquiring a title o... (more) |
— | 2 months ago |
| Edit | Post #286064 |
Post edited: |
— | 2 months ago |
| Edit | Post #286064 | Initial revision | — | 2 months ago |
| Question | — |
How does 'contango' semantically appertain to (1) 'continue'? (2) Or 'contain' as in Spanish 'contengo'? I know that in Spanish, contengo is the first person singular conjugation of contener "to contain". I surmise that English transcribed the Spanish /e/ into an "a". Etymonline > 1853, "charge made or percentage received by a broker or seller for deferring settlement of a stock sale," a stockbrok... (more) |
— | 2 months ago |
| Edit | Post #286063 |
Post edited: |
— | 2 months ago |
| Edit | Post #286063 |
Post edited: |
— | 2 months ago |
| Edit | Post #286063 | Initial revision | — | 2 months ago |
| Question | — |
How did 'in' + 'as' + 'much' (⟶ inasmuch) compound to mean "in an equal or like degree"? I quote the OED 's etymology for the adverb inasmuch. >originally 3 words in as much (in northern Middle English in als mikel), subsequently sometimes written as 2 words, in asmuch, and now (especially since 17th cent.) as one. > >I. In phrase inasmuch AS. >[=] In so far as, [...], in proporti... (more) |
— | 2 months ago |
| Edit | Post #286062 |
Post edited: |
— | 2 months ago |
| Edit | Post #286062 | Initial revision | — | 2 months ago |
| Question | — |
How did (the cross-linguistic univerbation) 'nothing/not/none/no + less' semantically shift to mean 'despite'? Several West European languages, most spoken in 2022, feature cognate adverbs with the meaning of ''nevertheless' by univerbating "nothing/not/none/no" +"less". 1. What semantic notions underlie their original literal ("nothing/never the less") and modern subsequent (despite something that you ... (more) |
— | 2 months ago |
| Edit | Post #286056 | Initial revision | — | 3 months ago |
| Question | — |
How did 'ad-' + 'rogare' compound to mean 'to make great claims about oneself'? 1. What does the prefix ad- semantically mean here? 2. How did the compounding of ad- + rogare yield 'to make great claims about oneself' and "to claim for oneself, assume"? 3. What semantic notions underlie ad- + rogare with 'to make great claims about oneself'? Doubtless, the act of asking ... (more) |
— | 3 months ago |
| Edit | Post #286040 | Initial revision | — | 3 months ago |
| Question | — |
How can fulsome constitute "a case of ironic understatement"? Pretend that you're Devil's Advocate. 1. How can you possibly contend that fulsome is "a case of ironic understatement"? 2. What's ironic? 3. What's fulsome understating? When I first read this etymology, the notion of redundancy crossed my mind for 2 reasons. I. If something's FULL (e... (more) |
— | 3 months ago |
| Edit | Post #284868 |
Post edited: |
— | 3 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281088 |
Post edited: |
— | 3 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281088 |
Post edited: |
— | 3 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281047 |
Post edited: |
— | 3 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281047 |
Post edited: |
— | 3 months ago |
| Edit | Post #284662 |
Post edited: |
— | 3 months ago |
| Edit | Post #284877 |
Post edited: |
— | 4 months ago |
| Comment | Post #284914 |
Definitely! Thanks for this sterling answer. Can I ask if you've studied linguistics, and to what degree? I don't think a layperson would've thought of this metaphor. Shame that I can't react to answers here! (more) |
— | 4 months ago |
| Edit | Post #284868 |
Post edited: |
— | 4 months ago |
| Edit | Post #284868 |
Post edited: |
— | 4 months ago |
| Edit | Post #285636 | Initial revision | — | 4 months ago |
| Answer | — |
A: What semantic notions underlie "pull, drag" (in tractō) 🡒 "negotiate, bargain" (in 'treat')? I revamped Serious-Telephone142's answer for grammar. >Negotiation involves a metaphorical pushing and pulling, a give and take. This sense is preserved in the modern English word 'intractable,' referring to someone who refuses to be pulled (so to speak) on an issue. > >It is not such a leap fro... (more) |
— | 4 months ago |
| Edit | Post #285633 |
Post edited: |
— | 4 months ago |
| Edit | Post #285633 |
Post edited: |
— | 4 months ago |
| Edit | Post #285633 | Initial revision | — | 4 months ago |
| Question | — |
What semantic notions underlie "pull, drag" (in tractō) 🡒 "negotiate, bargain" (in 'treat')? Etymonline below blazons the sense of "negotiate, bargain" in treat. Please see the green line for the sense of "pull, drag" from tractō. I added the red lines beside 8(b) and 9, because these senses of tractō appertain to "negotiate, bargain". Negotiation and bargaining usually require discussio... (more) |
— | 4 months ago |
| Edit | Post #285624 |
Post edited: |
— | 4 months ago |
| Edit | Post #285624 | Initial revision | — | 4 months ago |
| Question | — |
What semantic notions underlie vērum's 2 superficially unrelated senses — "truly" vs. 'but; yet; however'? How did the adverb vērum semantically shift from "truly" to mean 'but, yet, however'? These 2 senses look completely unrelated to me! Image alt text Oxford Latin Dictionary (2012 2 ed), pp 2254-5. (more) |
— | 4 months ago |
| Edit | Post #282694 |
Post edited: |
— | 5 months ago |
| Comment | Post #285356 |
Did you ask this on https://old.reddit.com/r/LearnHebrew/, https://old.reddit.com/r/hebrew/? (more) |
— | 5 months ago |
| Edit | Post #285360 |
Post edited: |
— | 5 months ago |
| Edit | Post #285360 | Initial revision | — | 5 months ago |
| Question | — |
Why did linguists choose 'Patient' (noun) to denote this Thematic Role? > THEMES and PATIENTS are rather similar, and not all linguists distinguish between these roles. A THEME typically moves from one location or one person to another, like the letter in (31). A PATIENT (or undergoer), like the window in (35), is physically affected by the ... (more) |
— | 5 months ago |
| Edit | Post #285258 |
Post edited: |
— | 5 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281914 |
Post edited: |
— | 5 months ago |
| Edit | Post #285258 |
Post edited: |
— | 5 months ago |
| Edit | Post #285258 |
Post edited: |
— | 5 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281914 |
Post edited: |
— | 5 months ago |
| Edit | Post #285258 |
Post edited: |
— | 5 months ago |
| Edit | Post #285258 | Initial revision | — | 5 months ago |
| Question | — |
Why does the Latin prefix 'in-' also mean the English 'to', when Latin 'ad-' already means 'to'? I quote Etymonline on impute (v.): >early 15c., from Old French imputer, emputer (14c.) and directly from Latin imputare "to reckon, make account of, charge, ascribe," from assimilated form of in- "in, into" (from PIE root en "in")(2)) + putare "to trim, prune; reckon, clea... (more) |
— | 5 months ago |
| Edit | Post #285114 | Initial revision | — | 5 months ago |
| Answer | — |
A: How does taking, buying, procuring (emō) semantically appertain to destruction, annihilation (perimō)? I admit I'm unschooled at Googling! Only after I wrote this post, did I stumble on Draconis's answer on Latin SE. >While emō normally means "buy", the ancestral meaning seems to have been something like "take". Compare the Proto-Slavic cognate ę-ti "take, acquire", or the distant Latin relative pō... (more) |
— | 5 months ago |
| Edit | Post #283613 |
Post edited: |
— | 5 months ago |
| Edit | Post #283613 |
Post edited: |
— | 5 months ago |
| Edit | Post #285113 |
Post edited: |
— | 5 months ago |
| Edit | Post #285113 | Initial revision | — | 5 months ago |
| Question | — |
How does taking, buying, procuring (emō) semantically appertain to destruction, annihilation (perimō)? As you can read below, emō meant to take, buy, gain, procure. But perimō meant to destroy and annihilate. Plainly, their meanings differ! So why was perimō formed from emō and compounded with per-? How does emō semantically appertain to perimō's meanings? >### peremptory [16] > >Peremptory com... (more) |
— | 5 months ago |
| Edit | Post #285096 | Initial revision | — | 6 months ago |
| Answer | — |
A: How does "happening" appertain to "(be)falling"? u/yutani333 answered this at https://old.reddit.com/r/linguistics/comments/r5gp90/whydosomanylanguagesexpresshappeningas/hmspxm6/. >The central idea of the metaphor of "fall" > "happen" is one of agency. When something happens to you, you are generally not the agent of that action (cf. I happen (t... (more) |
— | 6 months ago |
| Edit | Post #284877 | Initial revision | — | 6 months ago |
| Question | — |
How's inVESTing semantically related to VEST? Isn't the "idea of dressing your capital up in different clothes" insane? Isn't "the idea of dressing one’s capital up in different clothes by putting it into a particular business, stock, etc" batty and nutty? This semantic relationship probably would never cross the mind of a retail amateur investor in 2021. Before I read these quotations below, I had never heard of t... (more) |
— | 6 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281087 |
Post edited: |
— | 6 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281917 |
Post edited: |
— | 6 months ago |
| Edit | Post #280932 |
Post edited: |
— | 6 months ago |
| Edit | Post #284868 |
Post edited: |
— | 6 months ago |
| Edit | Post #284868 |
Post edited: |
— | 6 months ago |
| Edit | Post #284868 |
Post edited: |
— | 6 months ago |
| Edit | Post #284868 | Initial revision | — | 6 months ago |
| Question | — |
What semantic notions underlie the legal meaning of 'vest' — with its original meanings of 'robe', 'gown'? How does the legal meaning of 'vest' (quoted first below) semantically appertain to its original lay meanings of 'robe', 'gown' (quoted second)? >VESTING >the satisfaction of all the requirements necessary for a right to property to become unconditional; the completion of the transfer of pr... (more) |
— | 6 months ago |
| Edit | Post #284866 |
Post edited: |
— | 6 months ago |
| Edit | Post #284867 |
Post edited: |
— | 6 months ago |
| Edit | Post #284867 | Initial revision | — | 6 months ago |
| Question | — |
How does saeculum ( “generation” or “lifetime") semantically relate to PIE root *se- "to sow"? Why did historical linguists impute saeculum to PIE se-? What semantic notions underlie them? All boldenings are mine. secular (adj) > c. 1300, "living in the world, not belonging to a religious order," also "belonging to the state," from Old French seculer (Modern French séculier), from Late ... (more) |
— | 6 months ago |
| Edit | Post #284866 | Initial revision | — | 6 months ago |
| Question | — |
How does propitius (“favorable, well-disposed") semantically relate to PIE root *per- (1) "forward")? Why did historical linguists impute propitius to PIE per-1? What semantic notions underlie them? All boldenings are mine. > # propitiation (n.) > > late 14c., propiciacioun, "atonement, expiation," from Late Latin propitiationem (nominative propitiatio) "an atonement," noun of action from past... (more) |
— | 6 months ago |
| Edit | Post #280932 |
Post edited: |
— | 6 months ago |
| Edit | Post #280932 |
Post edited: |
— | 6 months ago |
| Edit | Post #280932 |
Post edited: |
— | 6 months ago |
| Edit | Post #279109 |
Post edited: |
— | 6 months ago |
| Edit | Post #283287 |
Post edited: |
— | 6 months ago |
| Edit | Post #284801 | Initial revision | — | 6 months ago |
| Question | — |
How did 'unless' evolve to mean 'if not'? >[[Etymonline:]](http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?allowedinframe=0&search=unless&searchmode=none) mid-15c., earlier onlesse, from on lesse (than) "`on a less condition (than)`; see less. The first syllable originally on, but the negative connotation and the lack of stress changed it to un-. ... ... (more) |
— | 6 months ago |
| Edit | Post #280932 |
Post edited: |
— | 6 months ago |
| Edit | Post #284731 | Initial revision | — | 7 months ago |
| Question | — |
How did syn + ek + dekhesthai compound to signify "supply a thought or word; take with something else, join in receiving"? In particular, the ex- befuddles me, because synekdekhesthai doesn't appear to signify any notion of outness or outwardness! I quote Etymonline. >## synecdoche (n.) > > "figure of speech in which a part is taken for the whole or vice versa," late 15c. correction of synodoches (late ... (more) |
— | 7 months ago |
| Edit | Post #284730 | Initial revision | — | 7 months ago |
| Question | — |
Is the etymology of 'amphigory' semantically related to the English idiom 'go round in circles'? Any semantic relationship between amphigory > # amphigory (n.) > > "burlesque nonsense writing or verse," 1809, from French amphigouri (18c.), which is of unknown origin, perhaps itself a nonsense word, though the first element seems to suggest Greek amphi (see amphi-). The second sometimes is ... (more) |
— | 7 months ago |
| Edit | Post #284665 |
Post edited: |
— | 7 months ago |
| Edit | Post #284665 |
Post edited: |
— | 7 months ago |
| Edit | Post #284665 | Initial revision | — | 7 months ago |
| Question | — |
How did 'equity' semantically broaden to mean 'common shares'? I ask about its meaning merely for stocks here (not Equity = Assets — Liabilities). See Personal Finance For Canadians For Dummies (2018), p 217. >Equity — not to be confused with equity in real estate — is another word for stocks. >![enter image description here][1] [1]: https://i.s... (more) |
— | 7 months ago |
| Edit | Post #284664 |
Post edited: |
— | 7 months ago |
| Edit | Post #284664 | Initial revision | — | 7 months ago |
| Question | — |
How did 'equity' semantically shift to signify 'Assets — Liabilities'? Here I ask merely ask about Equity = Assets — Liabilities here, not its meaning as stock. 1. Why was 'equity' was adopted to describe this difference? >equity: In the real-estate world, this term refers to the difference between the market value of your home and what you owe on it. For example,... (more) |
— | 7 months ago |
| Edit | Post #284662 |
Post edited: |
— | 7 months ago |
| Edit | Post #284663 |
Post edited: |
— | 7 months ago |
| Edit | Post #284663 |
Post edited: |
— | 7 months ago |
| Edit | Post #284663 |
Post edited: |
— | 7 months ago |
| Edit | Post #284663 | Initial revision | — | 7 months ago |
| Question | — |
How did "bail" shift to signify "money deposited as a guarantee when released"? I fail to understand this etymology for bail (n.1), particularly the first paragraph. > [3.] "bond money, security given to obtain the release of a prisoner," late 15c., a sense that apparently developed from that of [2.] "temporary release (of an arrested person) from jail" (into the... (more) |
— | 7 months ago |
| Edit | Post #284662 |
Post edited: |
— | 7 months ago |
| Edit | Post #284662 |
Post edited: |
— | 7 months ago |
| Edit | Post #284662 | Initial revision | — | 7 months ago |
| Question | — |
How did 'security' semantically shift to signify 'tradable financial asset'? What semantic notions underlie the Latinate meanings of 'security' (quoting Etymonline first) >mid-15c., "condition of being secure," from Latin securitas, from securus "free from care" (see secure). > >secure [16] Something that is secure is etymologically ‘carefree’. The word was borrowed fr... (more) |
— | 7 months ago |
| Comment | Post #284634 |
Many thanks! How did you happen upon Dominique Legallois's article? Google? (more) |
— | 7 months ago |
| Edit | Post #284617 |
Post edited: |
— | 7 months ago |
| Edit | Post #284617 | Initial revision | — | 7 months ago |
| Question | — |
How did « histoire », in « histoire de/que », semantically shift to signify "in order to/that"? This French StackExchange post merely paraprhased "histoire de/que" as afin de / afin que, meaning pour / pour que — all this can be translated as "in order to/that" in English. But nobody in fact mooted, let alone, expatiate the etymology of "histoire de/que"! histoire itself entered English as... (more) |
— | 7 months ago |
| Edit | Post #279046 |
Post edited: |
— | 9 months ago |
| Edit | Post #279811 |
Post edited: |
— | 9 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281187 |
Post edited: |
— | 9 months ago |
| Edit | Post #283612 |
Post edited: |
— | 9 months ago |
| Edit | Post #283612 |
Post edited: |
— | 9 months ago |
| Edit | Post #283613 |
Post edited: |
— | 9 months ago |
| Edit | Post #283613 | Initial revision | — | 9 months ago |
| Question | — |
videlicet : How did '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. > > 1530s, abbreviation of videlicet [2.] "that is to say, to wit, namely" (mid-15c.), from Latin videlicet, contraction of videre licet [1.] "it is permi... (more) |
— | 9 months ago |
| Edit | Post #283612 | Initial revision | — | 9 months ago |
| Question | — |
scilicet: How did 'it is permitted to know' semantically shift to signify 'that is to say, namely'? 1. How did signification 1 beneath semantically shift to 2? 2. I'm befuddled by the relevant of licit, because what does "permitted" here signify? Why would a Roman require permission to know something? scilicet on Etymonline. > late 14c., Latin, "you may know, you may be sure, it is certai... (more) |
— | 9 months ago |
| Edit | Post #283289 |
Post edited: |
— | 9 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281175 |
Post edited: |
— | 9 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281174 |
Post edited: |
— | 9 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281085 |
Post edited: |
— | 9 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281085 |
Post edited: |
— | 9 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281085 |
Post edited: |
— | 9 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281085 |
Post edited: |
— | 9 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281085 |
Post edited: |
— | 9 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281174 |
Post edited: |
— | 9 months ago |
| Edit | Post #283289 | Initial revision | — | 9 months ago |
| Question | — |
What's the semantic field of "putare"? What SINGLE bigger picture and base meaning relates, bestrides, and underlies all 9 of putare's superficially UNrelated, but multitudinous, meanings below?  Oxford Latin Dictionary (2012 2 ed), pp 1679-1680. (more) |
— | 9 months ago |
| Edit | Post #283287 | Initial revision | — | 9 months ago |
| Question | — |
How did 'style' signify names of court cases? Can you please expatiate on ohwilleke's answer? She asseverated >My suspicion is that the Latin/French word for a writing instrument ends up being used for the act of using a writing instrument to place a name upon something, which in turn comes to mean the name written as a result of this act, wh... (more) |
— | 9 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281913 |
Post edited: |
— | 10 months ago |
| Edit | Post #282694 | Initial revision | — | 10 months ago |
| Question | — |
Why does "counter" mean the area of a letter entirely, or partially, enclosed by a letter form or a symbol? 1. Etymonline's entries for the homonyms "counter" don't semantically appertain to its meaning in typography. How does "counter" in typography relate to the common lay English 2021 meanings of "counter"? Solely Wrzlprmft♦'s answer distinguishes "counter" from "aperture". 2. Why did the typography ... (more) |
— | 10 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281917 |
Post edited: |
— | 11 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281046 |
Post edited: |
— | 12 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281977 |
Post edited: |
— | 12 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281977 |
Post edited: |
— | 12 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281977 | Initial revision | — | 12 months ago |
| Question | — |
Why did David Ricardo coin "rent", to signify income from a factor of production that exceeds the minimum amount necessary (to beget that factor of production)? 1. At the time that Ricardo (1772-1823) coined "rent", did "rent" already signify Modern English's lay meaning of 'rent' (tenant's regular payment to a landlord for the use of property or land)? How prevalent was this ordinary meaning? 2. If so, why did Ricardo still coin "rent" and beget this a... (more) |
— | 12 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281918 | Initial revision | — | 12 months ago |
| Question | — |
How does the original meaning of “but” (“outside”) relate to its current 2021 meanings? How do the principal 2021 meanings of "but" relate, if any, to its original meaning of "outside"? E.g. how does "no more than; only" appertain to "outside"? >### CONJUNCTION >1. Used to introduce a phrase or clause contrasting with what has already been mentioned. >2. [with negative or in q... (more) |
— | 12 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281917 |
Post edited: |
— | 12 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281917 |
Post edited: |
— | 12 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281917 |
Post edited: |
— | 12 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281917 | Initial revision | — | 12 months ago |
| Question | — |
How did 'to wit' shift to denote 'that is to say'? Unquestionably, "knowing" isn't the same concept as "saying". Thus how did 'that is to wit' shift to denote 'that is to say; namely'? >### wit > >Both the noun wit [OE] and the verb [OE] go back ultimately to the Indo-European base woid-, weid-, wid-. This originally meant ‘see’, in which se... (more) |
— | 12 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281914 | Initial revision | — | 12 months ago |
| Question | — |
How can the Latin prefix 'in-' possibly befit imputare? I quote Etymonline on impute (v.): >early 15c., from Old French imputer, emputer (14c.) and directly from Latin imputare "to reckon, make account of, charge, ascribe," from assimilated form of in- "in, into" (from PIE root en "in")(2)) + putare "to trim, prune; reckon, clea... (more) |
— | 12 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281913 | Initial revision | — | 12 months ago |
| Question | — |
How did 'in-' + 'putare' compound to mean 'to attribute, credit to'? I quote Etymonline on impute (v.): >early 15c., from Old French imputer, emputer (14c.) and directly from Latin imputare "to reckon, make account of, charge, ascribe," from assimilated form of in- "in, into" (from PIE root en "in")(2)) + putare "to trim, prune; reckon, clea... (more) |
— | 12 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281613 | Initial revision | — | about 1 year ago |
| Question | — |
How did 'forfeit' shift to signify ‘penalty imposed for committing such a misdeed'? I don't understand this semantic shift, because a misdeed differs from a penalty or "something to which the right is lost through a misdeed". Can someone please fill in the gap? >### forfeit [13] >A forfeit was originally a ‘transgression’ or ‘misdemeanour’. The word comes from Old French for... (more) |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #281210 |
Post edited: |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #281331 | Initial revision | — | about 1 year ago |
| Question | — |
How did “negotiable” mean “a good or security whose ownership is easily transferable”? I knew merely the first most popular meaning of negotiate. I never knew this second legal meaning >A document of an amount of money, or a title, which is readily transferable to another. Difference between Transferability and Negotiability - SRD Law Notes > Negotiability also gives a right... (more) |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #279828 |
Thanks so much Jirka Hanika, as always! Do you mind writing another answer completely in English, without referring to any other language? I have another ESL friend who asked this, and this one's Japanese! I don't want you to have to write a separate answer for each new mother tongue. (more) |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #281330 | Initial revision | — | about 1 year ago |
| Question | — |
What spoken human languages in 2021 don't salute with words related to health or peace? 1. What are the exceptions to the fact that most Asian, Middle Eastern and European languages greet with words anent health or peace? I know that "salutation" itself meant "health". 2. Why don't these exceptional languages salute with words anent well-being? Surely their speakers must still c... (more) |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #281329 | Initial revision | — | about 1 year ago |
| Question | — |
Why do the most spoken human languages in 2021 greet with words related to health or peace? Why do most Asian, Middle Eastern and European languages greet with words anent health or peace? I know that "salutation" itself meant "health". >### salute [14] >Salute goes back ultimately to the Latin noun salūs, a relative of salvus ‘safe, healthy’ (source of English safe and save). T... (more) |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #281328 | Initial revision | — | about 1 year ago |
| Question | — |
How did “a pesar de” signify “in spite of”? In Spanish and Portuguese, a pesar de means in (de)spite of. But in both languages, pesar has never meant spite. pesar hails from Vulgar Latin \pēsāre"), from Classical Latin pēnsāre. But then how does pesar yield the meaning in spite of? (more) |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #281212 | Initial revision | — | about 1 year ago |
| Question | — |
Please expound and simplify the semantic progression behind "reduce"? I don't understand the "semantic progression" that I emboldened below. The steps in the "semantic progression" feel too farfetched and unconnected. Can someone please fill in, and expound, the steps in Simple English? >### reduce [14] >‘Lessen, diminish’ is a comparatively recent semantic de... (more) |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #281211 | Initial revision | — | about 1 year ago |
| Question | — |
How did "join issue" mean ‘jointly submit a disputed matter to the decision of the court’? Kindly see the embolded phrase below. Etymonline is written too abstrusely. >### issue [13] >The words issue and exit are closely related etymologically. Both go back ultimately to the Latin verb exīre ‘go out’. Its past participle exitus became in Vulgar Latin exūtus, whose feminine form ... (more) |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #281210 | Initial revision | — | about 1 year ago |
| Question | — |
Why “chose” in action? Why not “right/droit” in action? >### Chose (in action) > this can be translated as ‘thing in action’. It is an intangible right which is essentially a right to sue. JC Smith's The Law of Contract 2021 3 ed, p 476. Law French used "droit", and in 2021 French, droit (the noun) still signifies "right". Why use a vaguer supern... (more) |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #281176 |
Post edited: |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #281187 | Initial revision | — | about 1 year ago |
| Question | — |
How does "drive out" shift to signify "weigh out"? I boldened the relevant parts of the quotations, so that you don't have to read all of the quotations. I'm untrained at metaphors! How did "drive out" develop the metaphor of "weigh out"? >### exact [15] > >The adjective exact ‘precise’ and the verb exact ‘demand with severity’ have undergon... (more) |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #281186 | Initial revision | — | about 1 year ago |
| Question | — |
How did kúklos ("circular") shift to signify "general"? >### encyclopedia [16] >Etymologically, encyclopedia means ‘general education’. It is a medieval formation, based on the Greek phrase egkúklios paideíā (egkúklios, a compound adjective formed from the prefix en- ‘in’ and kúklos ‘circle’ – source of English cycle – meant originally ‘circular... (more) |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #281184 | Initial revision | — | about 1 year ago |
| Question | — |
How did "put under" shift to signify "cause to take the place of", then "enough"? 1. How did "put under" shift to signify "cause to take the place of"? 2. Then how did "cause to take the place of" shift to signify "enough"? >### sufficient [14] >Sufficient originated as the present participle of Latin sufficere ‘be enough’ (source also of English suffice [14]). This ... (more) |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #281177 |
Post edited: |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #281175 |
Post edited: |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #281177 | Initial revision | — | about 1 year ago |
| Question | — |
How did 'quibus?' shift to mean 'evasion of a point at issue'? >### quibble [17] >Quibble probably originated as a rather ponderous learned joke-word. It is derived from an earlier and now obsolete quib ‘pun’, which appears to have been based on quibus, the dative and ablative plural of Latin quī ‘who, what’. The notion is that since quibus made freque... (more) |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #281176 | Initial revision | — | about 1 year ago |
| Question | — |
How did 'solicit' semantically shift to signify ‘manage affairs’? I don't understand the semantic shift from sollicitāre ‘disturb, agitate’ to the meaning of "manage affairs", probably because "disturb, agitate" pejoratively connotes discontentment and upheaval, but "manage affairs" neutrally (or even positively) connotes business or transactions. So this shift in ... (more) |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #281175 | Initial revision | — | about 1 year ago |
| Question | — |
How did 'repraesentāre' semantically shift to signify 'standing in the place of another'? To wit, how does "present again, bring back" (in repraesentāre) semantically appertain to the notion of 'standing in the place of another'? >### represent [14] > >English borrowed represent from Latin repraesentāre, which meant ‘present again, bring back’, hence ‘show’. It was a compound ver... (more) |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #281174 |
Post edited: |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #281174 | Initial revision | — | about 1 year ago |
| Question | — |
How did 'folding back' semantically shift to mean 'reply'? To wit, how does the notion of "folding back" semantically appertain to "respond"? >### reply [14] > >Etymologically, reply means ‘fold back’. It comes ultimately from Latin replicāre ‘fold back, unfold’, a compound verb formed from the prefix re- ‘back’ and plicāre ‘fold’ (source of Englis... (more) |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #281173 |
Post edited: |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #281173 | Initial revision | — | about 1 year ago |
| Question | — |
How can "lemma" be translated as "rede-ship" with merely Germanic etymons? >Attempts to fashion a purer form of literary English can be seen in the poetry of Edmund Spenser in the 16th century and William Barnes in the 19th century. Barnes’ arguments against borrowing were primarily directed at perspicuity and ease of understanding—although his proposed replacement... (more) |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #281172 | Initial revision | — | about 1 year ago |
| Question | — |
Why are service or maintenance contracts called 'warranties', when they aren't Legal Warranties? >The term 'warranty' is used to distinguish between a term (warranty) and a mere representation, and also to distinguish between terms that give no right to termination upon breach (warranties) and terms that do (conditions). Service contracts for electrical and similar items are not really good exam... (more) |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #281089 | Initial revision | — | about 1 year ago |
| Question | — |
What did the etymons of “on by + out, over, up” mean? 1. What did the etymons of "on by out", "on by up", "on by over" mean? 2. Why did Old English tack and jam these different prepositions together? E.g. didn't ufan alone mean "above"? Why prefix it with a- and -b- that appear to conribute nothing to the meaning? >### about [OE] >About i... (more) |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #281088 | Initial revision | — | about 1 year ago |
| Question | — |
How does the semantic notion of “in defiance of” signify “notwithstanding”? The semantic notion of “in defiance of” feels unrelated to “notwithstanding”! What underlies or relates these semantic notions? This question appertains to all languages that founds this conjunction on the Latin despectus e.g. French en dépit de, Italian a dispetto di, Spanish a despecho de, and P... (more) |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #281087 | Initial revision | — | about 1 year ago |
| Question | — |
How does "happening" appertain to "(be)falling"? I don't understand why English and Latin (see the two quotations below) uses the notion of "(be)fall" to signify "happening". How are they related semantically? >### accident [14] > >Etymologically, an accident is simply ‘something which happens’ – ‘an event’. That was what the word original... (more) |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #281086 | Initial revision | — | about 1 year ago |
| Question | — |
Expound and simplify the "semantic progression" behind "must"? I don't understand the "semantic progression" that I emboldened. The steps in the "semantic progression" feel farfetched and unconnected to me. Can someone please fill in, and elaborate, the steps? I try to explain my bafflement. 1→2. If you've measured out time for doing something, then you def... (more) |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #281085 | Initial revision | — | about 1 year ago |
| Question | — |
How's “drag” (tractāre) semantically related to “handle, deal with, discuss”? 1. How exactly did tractāre branch out "metaphorically to ‘handle, deal with, discuss’"? 2. How does "dragging" semantically appertain to ‘handle, deal with, discuss’? Dragging connotes physical effort, e.g. if a human or animal is dragging objects behind them. "Deal with" and "discuss" feel ... (more) |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #281047 | Initial revision | — | about 1 year ago |
| Question | — |
How can "in terms of" alone encompass — and substitute — multiple prepositions "at, by, as, or for"? >in terms of. This phrase is commonly used as a substitute for a precise identification of relationship or as a substitute for such prepositions as at, by, as, or for. The phrase is correctly used when one thing is being expressed in terms of another thing, as when a rule is discussed in terms of its... (more) |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #281046 |
Post edited: |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #281046 | Initial revision | — | about 1 year ago |
| Question | — |
How did "as" amass all its confusing "broad and vague meanings"? >as. Do not use the conjunction as when you mean “since,” “because,” “when,” or “while.” Its broad and vague meanings can create confusion. For example, As a potential work stoppage threatened to block the opening of school, the arbitrators revised the wording of the contract. Does as mean “when,” “b... (more) |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #281045 | Initial revision | — | about 1 year ago |
| Question | — |
How do Latin etymons that end in English in *-tion* nearly always name a process? I don't think the emboldening is correct, because -ing gerunds name a process. See https://english.stackexchange.com/a/444498. -tion just names a result of that process. What do you think? > In English and many other languages the word for transla- tion is a two-headed... (more) |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #280932 |
Post edited: |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #280932 | Initial revision | — | about 1 year ago |
| Question | — |
How did 'less than' semantically shift to mean 'if not'? What semantic notions underlie less than and IF NOT? How did less than semantically shift to mean IF NOT in at least these 5 languages? Just edit this post if you pine to add other languages with this semantic shift. >1. unless (conj.) mid-15c., earlier onlesse, from (not) on lesse (than... (more) |
— | about 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #279811 |
Post edited: |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #279811 |
Post edited: |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #279811 |
Post edited: |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #280063 | Initial revision | — | over 1 year ago |
| Question | — |
How does backwardation semantically relate to "backward"? What semantic notions underlie any sense of 'backwardness' (like "backward" or "backwards"), with the meaning of 'backwardation' below? Etymonline overlooked this term. OED is too brusque and doesn't expound the etymology. John Hull. Options, Futures, and Other Derivatives (2017 10 edn). p 129. ... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #279811 |
@msh210 You may be correct, but I can ask the same question for "able to be [verb]ed". Ability to be paid doesn't mean requirement to be paid. So "payable" did shift semantically. (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #279810 |
@JirkaHanika Hello again! Not this time! I can relate to knots as problems for me personally, because I'm bad at untying knots. Her native language is Russian, I think.
(more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #279811 |
Post edited: |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #279811 | Initial revision | — | over 1 year ago |
| Question | — |
How did “-able” semantically shift to mean “requiring”? Etymonline on "-able" doesn't expound the origin of "requiring". > # \-able > > common termination and word-forming element of English adjectives (typically based on verbs) and generally adding a notion of "capable of; allowed; worthy of; requiring; to be \\\\\\ed," sometimes "full of, causing... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #279810 | Initial revision | — | over 1 year ago |
| Question | — |
How can a problem or puzzle be analogized as a knot? An ESL student was asking about the quotation below at my school, but I don't know how to expound or simplify to her that "A problem or puzzle can be thought of as a knot." Any ideas? She knows what a knot is, but somehow she can't connect the dots between a knot and a problem. > The Latin root... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #279766 |
Post edited: |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #279731 |
Many thanks as always for your answers! Can you please elaborate on how the meaning got verbified? Please don't hesitate just to edit your an
swer, rather than posting a comment. Once verbified, what did "ad grex", i.e. "to the group" or "to the herd" mean? For instance, in English, it's unidiomati... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #279766 | Initial revision | — | over 1 year ago |
| Question | — |
What semantic notions underlie "gasket" with "little gird, maidservant"? I see that Etymonline warns of gasket's uncertain origin, but I still pine to understand this possible etymology. I know little about sailing, and Wikipedia annunciates: > gaskets are lengths of rope or fabric used for reefing a sail, or hold a stowed sail in place. This etymology feels misogy... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #279683 | Initial revision | — | over 1 year ago |
| Question | — |
How can a prepositional phrase shift to become a verb? I don't know why, but the embolded semantic shift for agree (v.) below unsettles me. 1. a gré is a prepositional phrase, correct? 2. If so, how can a prepositional phrase transmogrify into a verb (e.g. agreer)? Can you please make this shift feel more intuitive, or naturalize this shift? ... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #279682 |
Post edited: |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #279682 | Initial revision | — | over 1 year ago |
| Question | — |
What semantic notions underlie 'privity' with 'privity of contract'? The OED 3 ed, June 2007 defines >b. privity of contract n. the limitation of a contractual relationship to the two parties making the contract, which prevents any action at law by an interested third party such as a beneficiary. but doesn't expound why "privity" fits, or was adopted for, this... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #279047 |
Post edited: |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #279490 |
@Jirka Thank you for your answer, and for offering to research the second meaning. Please feel free to edit my post if it's unclear. I intended to ask how "repartee" (or its French etymons) shifted to mean "riposte". (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Comment | Post #279490 |
"The second meaning is probably metaphorically derived from the first one." Yes, I know, but how? That's the question, but you've only re-stated it. I'm uncertain if you've answered this? The rest of your answer doesn't answer it. (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #279551 | Initial revision | — | over 1 year ago |
| Question | — |
How did 'equity' semantically shift to mean 'Assets — Liabilities'? I ask about Equity = Assets — Liabilities here, not its meaning as stock. See Personal Finance For Canadians For Dummies (2018), p 468. >equity: In the real-estate world, this term refers to the difference between the market value of your home and what you owe on it. For example, if your home is... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #279109 | Initial revision | — | over 1 year ago |
| Question | — |
How did 'consideration' shift to signify grounds and the act of deliberation, then inducer of a grant or promise? > The name of Consideration appears only about the beginning of the sixteenth century, and we do not know by what steps it became a settled term of art. The word seems to have gone through the following significations : [1.] first, contemplation in general; [2.]... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #279047 | Initial revision | — | over 1 year ago |
| Question | — |
How did « re » + « partir » compound to "repartee", which means "rejoinder"? In French, « partir » means "to (de)part". What semantic notions underlie « re » + « partir » with the 2020 AD English meaning of repartee (i.e. riposting »))? (de)parting and replying don't seem related, probably because I know nothing about fencing. repartee (n.) > 1640s, "quick remark," from ... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #279046 | Initial revision | — | over 1 year ago |
| Question | — |
How did "re" + "join" semantically compound to mean "riposte"? In French, « joindre » means "to join". What semantic notions underlie « joindre » with the 2020 English "rejoin", which means to riposte? How did rejoindre shift to signify the 2020 English "rejoin"? Clearly, "to rejoin" and "to riposte" don't mean the same actions! This French Stack Exchange c... (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |
| Edit | Post #279045 | Initial revision | — | over 1 year ago |
| Question | — |
How did 'the better to —' semantically shift to mean 'So as to — better'? I screenshot Collins and Lexico. Image alt text Let's treat this like a math problem. How exactly does "the better to —" = 'So as to — better'? Please show all steps between these two expressions. (more) |
— | over 1 year ago |