Activity for PSTH
| Type | On... | Excerpt | Status | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Edit | Post #281917 |
Post edited: |
— | 5 days ago |
| Edit | Post #281046 |
Post edited: |
— | 20 days ago |
| Edit | Post #281977 |
Post edited: |
— | 20 days ago |
| Edit | Post #281977 |
Post edited: |
— | 20 days ago |
| Edit | Post #281977 | Initial revision | — | 20 days 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) |
— | 20 days ago |
| Edit | Post #281918 | Initial revision | — | 25 days 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) |
— | 25 days ago |
| Edit | Post #281917 |
Post edited: |
— | 25 days ago |
| Edit | Post #281917 |
Post edited: |
— | 25 days ago |
| Edit | Post #281917 |
Post edited: |
— | 25 days ago |
| Edit | Post #281917 | Initial revision | — | 25 days 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 sen... (more) |
— | 25 days ago |
| Edit | Post #281914 | Initial revision | — | 25 days ago |
| Question | — |
Why wasn't the prefix 'ad-' used for 'in-' + 'putare'? 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) |
— | 25 days ago |
| Edit | Post #281913 | Initial revision | — | 25 days 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) |
— | 25 days ago |
| Edit | Post #281613 | Initial revision | — | about 1 month 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 month ago |
| Edit | Post #281210 |
Post edited: |
— | about 2 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281331 | Initial revision | — | 2 months 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) |
— | 2 months 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) |
— | 2 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281330 | Initial revision | — | 2 months 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) |
— | 2 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281329 | Initial revision | — | 2 months 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) |
— | 2 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281328 | Initial revision | — | 2 months 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) |
— | 2 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281212 | Initial revision | — | 3 months 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) |
— | 3 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281211 | Initial revision | — | 3 months 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) |
— | 3 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281210 | Initial revision | — | 3 months 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) |
— | 3 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281176 |
Post edited: |
— | 3 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281187 | Initial revision | — | 3 months 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 undergone... (more) |
— | 3 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281186 | Initial revision | — | 3 months 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) |
— | 3 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281185 | Initial revision | — | 3 months ago |
| Question | — |
What's the Semantic Field of puto? What single notion underlies all these 9 seemingly unrelated meanings of puto? Oxford Latin Dictionary 2012 2 edn, pp 1679, 1680. ![enter image description here][1] [1]: https://i.stack.imgur.com/yySxP.jpg (more) |
— | 3 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281184 | Initial revision | — | 3 months 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) |
— | 3 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281177 |
Post edited: |
— | 3 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281175 |
Post edited: |
— | 3 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281177 | Initial revision | — | 3 months 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) |
— | 3 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281176 | Initial revision | — | 3 months 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) |
— | 3 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281175 | Initial revision | — | 3 months ago |
| Question | — |
How did "represent" semantically shift to signify "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 verb formed from the prefix re- ‘back, again’ and praesentāre, source of English present. The notion of ‘standing in the place of another’ is a p... (more) |
— | 3 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281174 |
Post edited: |
— | 3 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281174 | Initial revision | — | 3 months ago |
| Question | — |
How did 'folding back' semantically shift to mean 'reply'? >### 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 English ply and related to English fold). This came to be used metaphorically for ‘go over ... (more) |
— | 3 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281173 |
Post edited: |
— | 3 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281173 | Initial revision | — | 3 months 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) |
— | 3 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281172 | Initial revision | — | 3 months 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) |
— | 3 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281089 | Initial revision | — | 3 months 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) |
— | 3 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281088 | Initial revision | — | 3 months ago |
| Question | — |
How does the notion of “in defiance of” signify “notwithstanding”? 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 Portuguese a despeito de. Don't hesitate to edit this post to add to this list. >### spite [13] >Spite was adapted from Old ... (more) |
— | 3 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281087 | Initial revision | — | 3 months 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 originall... (more) |
— | 3 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281086 | Initial revision | — | 3 months 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) |
— | 3 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281085 | Initial revision | — | 3 months ago |
| Question | — |
How's “drag” related to “handle, deal with, discuss”? How exactly did drag branch out "metaphorically 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 like business or transactions to me, where you're not dragging anything! >### treat ... (more) |
— | 3 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281047 | Initial revision | — | 3 months ago |
| Question | — |
How can "in terms of" substitute for such prepositions as "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) |
— | 3 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281046 |
Post edited: |
— | 3 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281046 | Initial revision | — | 3 months 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) |
— | 3 months ago |
| Edit | Post #281045 | Initial revision | — | 3 months 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) |
— | 3 months ago |
| Edit | Post #280932 |
Post edited: |
— | 4 months ago |
| Edit | Post #280932 | Initial revision | — | 4 months ago |
| Question | — |
How did 'less than' semantically shift to mean 'if not'? The 4 languages beneath features the same semantic shift. The prepositional phrase - preposition : a, à, on → un + - adverb : less + - comparative preposition : than shifted to signify 'if not'. What semantic notions underlie 'less than' and 'if not'? >1. unless (conj.) mid-1... (more) |
— | 4 months ago |
| Edit | Post #279811 |
Post edited: |
— | 5 months ago |
| Edit | Post #279811 |
Post edited: |
— | 6 months ago |
| Edit | Post #279811 |
Post edited: |
— | 6 months ago |
| Edit | Post #280063 | Initial revision | — | 6 months 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) |
— | 6 months 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) |
— | 6 months 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) |
— | 6 months ago |
| Edit | Post #279811 |
Post edited: |
— | 6 months ago |
| Edit | Post #279811 | Initial revision | — | 6 months 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) |
— | 6 months ago |
| Edit | Post #279810 | Initial revision | — | 6 months 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) |
— | 6 months ago |
| Edit | Post #279766 |
Post edited: |
— | 6 months 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) |
— | 6 months ago |
| Edit | Post #279766 | Initial revision | — | 6 months 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) |
— | 6 months ago |
| Edit | Post #279683 | Initial revision | — | 7 months 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) |
— | 7 months ago |
| Edit | Post #279682 |
Post edited: |
— | 7 months ago |
| Edit | Post #279682 | Initial revision | — | 7 months 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) |
— | 7 months ago |
| Edit | Post #279047 |
Post edited: |
— | 7 months 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) |
— | 7 months 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) |
— | 7 months ago |
| Edit | Post #279551 | Initial revision | — | 7 months 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) |
— | 7 months ago |
| Edit | Post #279109 | Initial revision | — | 7 months 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) |
— | 7 months ago |
| Edit | Post #279047 | Initial revision | — | 7 months 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) |
— | 7 months ago |
| Edit | Post #279046 | Initial revision | — | 7 months 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) |
— | 7 months ago |
| Edit | Post #279045 | Initial revision | — | 7 months 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) |
— | 7 months ago |