Submitted by fbf • May 4, 2013
How can backwards be a word if backward is as well? Forwards and forward? Beside and besides?
I can’t turn a light switch ons, can I? Go outs the door?
Nouns can be plural, and verbs have tense, but prepositions?
When did we start pluralizing those?
8 comments
•
Posted in Etymology / History
Submitted by R • December 10, 2012
Why, in English, do we say ‘hey’ as a conversation starter? Why not hello? According to Merriam-Webster dictionary, hey is “used especially to call attention or to express interrogation, surprise, or exultation”. It does not mention any connection to the word hello. Why then, do we so often hear hey substituted for hello? Whether talking on the phone, texting, or just trying to make small talk in person, everyone always seems to begin with hey, even when you are already talking to the person and you don’t need their attention. My best guess is that is probably another development in our ever-changing language that came about over time, but does anyone know how this connotation came to be?
5 comments
•
Posted in Etymology / History
Submitted by Warsaw Will • September 29, 2012
If you’re over a certain age, you will probably be familiar with the expression - ‘If that’s what you think, you’ve got another think coming’. But if you’re a bit younger than me, you might well have heard it as - ‘You’ve got another thing coming’, especially if you’re a heavy metal fan. While I can understand that the saying could have changed through mishearing (an eggcorn?), I am puzzled as to how people who use the newer version understand it’s meaning. The original has a perfect logic to it (if not perfect grammar) which seems to me to be completely lost in the newer version.
35 comments
•
Posted in Etymology / History
Submitted by sigurd • September 11, 2012
What’s the difference in meaning between ‘-ic’ and ‘-ical’, for example, as in ‘horrific’ versus ‘horrifical’, ‘comic’ versus ‘comical’ ‘fantastic’ versus ‘fantastical’, ‘Eucharistic’ versus ‘Eucharistical’, ‘feministic’ versus ‘feministical’, ‘ecclesial’ vs ‘ecclesiastic’ vs ‘ecclesiastical’, etc?
The more informative the answer(s), the better.
10 comments
•
Posted in Etymology / History
Submitted by Dyske • April 30, 2012
The word “hack” has two distinct definitions. One means “to cut or sever with repeated irregular or unskillful blows.” This must be the origin of the word “hack” as used in the world of computers, i.e., to “hack into” a computer. You keep trying different tactics and passwords until you succeed.
But the word “hack” also means to cope with something, to make do with what you have and forget about the details, even if it’s not the proper way to do it, as in a “hack job”. This is a very different definition from the first but the two are often used interchangeably in a confusing way.
“Hackathon” for instance does not mean what many people assume it does. It’s not an event where a bunch of computer hackers try to hack into a system. The term “codefest” better describes what “hackathon” really is, where a bunch of computer programmers get together and collaborate on software applications. They are using the second definition, not the first.
I’m wondering which definition came first. And, where did the second definition come from? Did it exist before the days of computers?
9 comments
•
Posted in Etymology / History
Submitted by Thomas guzzi • October 28, 2011
I am playing rooster in a production of Annie and I need some terms of endearment that were used in the 20s and 30s. I use the term “blondie” but the woman I say it to isn’t blonde. How about “sweet cheeks”? Any help?
4 comments
•
Posted in Etymology / History
Submitted by sigurd • September 14, 2011
While/among/amid vs whilst/amongst/amidst
Which of the foregoing variants is older?
2 comments
•
Posted in Etymology / History
Submitted by pje • February 19, 2011
I have seen to-day and to-night used in literature up to the 1920′s. When and why did this become obsolete?
4 comments
•
Posted in Etymology / History
Submitted by spencer • October 18, 2010
How popular is the word stymie? Is it possible that it derives from the word stifle?
3 comments
•
Posted in Etymology / History
Submitted by shaunc • July 14, 2010
Has anyone come across “Anglish”? Anglish or Saxon is described as “...a form of English linguistic purism, which favours words of native (Germanic) origin over those of foreign (mainly Romance and Greek) origin.”
Does anybody have an opinion or thoughts on “Anglish”...
1866 comments
•
Posted in Etymology / History
Submitted by dan2 • June 27, 2010
I’ve noticed the phrase “oh wait” being used insincerely/sarcastically, to make a point. For example: “DOW 10,000!!!! Oh Wait, Make That 7,537.”
What is the origin of this sort of usage of “oh wait”?
2 comments
•
Posted in Etymology / History
Submitted by gretchen • March 16, 2010
I hear people make the word “mine” plural as in, “The book is mines.” This drives me crazy! Has anyone else had this experience and where did this word come from? I have been teaching for over 20 years and it seems to have surfaced in the last 6-8 years or so. Is it just people being lazy?
25 comments
•
Posted in Etymology / History
Submitted by Dyske • April 14, 2009
My 4-year old daughter haven’t learned about irregular verbs and nouns yet, so she often uses the regular versions like “hided”, “breaked”, “mouses”, “fishes”, etc.. Obviously kids learn the rules and try to consistently apply them instead of learning the usage of every word case by case. So, they face the same exact frustration that ESL students do, which was a bit of a surprise to me. I thought kids learn in a more empirical, case-by-case manner, rather than relying on logical patterns.
This lead me to look up the history of irregular verbs and nouns. If native speakers of English have a hard time learning it at first, how did irregular verbs and nouns come into existence in the first place? It’s as if some sadistic English teacher invented them so that he would have more things to test his students on.
I found this entry on Wikipedia about Indo-European ablaut which explains the history of it. Not being a linguist, I didn’t quite get some of the things explained there, but I understood that the irregular verbs and nouns came from different linguistic systems within which they were perfectly regular. In other words, the English language has incorporated different systems of inflection, and now we are stuck with them.
But I feel that this is something that we could all agree to change, just as the whole world (except for the Americans) decided at one point to adopt the metric system. We just have to deal with the grammar Nazis cringe and squirm uncontrollably for several years until they get over it. We would have one less thing we have to study at school, and the same time and effort can be used to learn something more meaningful and useful.
15 comments
•
Posted in Etymology / History
Submitted by howardthornhill • May 11, 2008
I have now found the phrase “pi the type” in two different books and have an idea of the meaning from the context. I would hope to learn more about the meaning and how it might have originated.
5 comments
•
Posted in Etymology / History
Submitted by goossun • July 26, 2007
Can anyone explain why the short forms or the nicknames for Robert and Richard are Bob and Dick?
11 comments
•
Posted in Etymology / History
Submitted by Dyske • February 8, 2007
Why is the word “ass” considered a curse word inappropriate for children? “Fuck” for instance is understandable because it refers to an act inappropriate for children to engage in. (I personally don’t care, but I understand why other parents would care.) For similar reasons, I understand why any words that refer to our sexual organs would be considered inappropriate for children. “Bitch” is also understandable because it degrades women by associating them to dogs.
When I look up the etymology of the word “ass”, all I see are references to buttocks and rear end. So, who decides or decided that “ass” should not be used by children?
It appears to me that some people at some point in history started using “ass” to mean a sexual object, and the usage gained in popularity. Suppose some famous comedian or writer starts using the word “buttocks” to mean the same, and it gains in popularity. Are we then to classify it as a curse word and prevent children from using it? Does it make sense to give into that kind of arbitrary forces?
35 comments
•
Posted in Etymology / History
Submitted by jarbalix • February 7, 2007
I can understand the need to shorten commonly used terms in technical language, but how did they get x from trans?
e.g.
transmit --> xmit
transfer --> xfer
“Trans” in this sense indicates a relocation from one thing to another. My only guess is that x is a graphical interpretation of a path crossing from one side to another.
Any suggestions?
11 comments
•
Posted in Etymology / History
Submitted by Dyske • January 25, 2007
The word “materialism” as used by the general public (as in Madonna’s “Material Girl”) is quite different from the one used by philosophers like Marx. I’m always surprised by how even highly educated people confuse the two. Communism is based on Marx’s materialist philosophy, yet the US is often described as a materialistic nation. This is confusing to many people.
Did the popular usage of “materialism” come out of the misuse/misunderstanding of the philosophical term? Or, does the popular usage have its own etymology/origin independent of the philosophical one? Or, was the philosophical one based on the popular usage?
3 comments
•
Posted in Etymology / History
Submitted by haynesgoddard • November 24, 2006
While this is normally a grammar question, I cannot find why we use the language “predicate nominative” to name parts of a sentence. On the surface it connotes nothing. A search of my grammar books, the unabridged dictionary, the OED and an on-line search reveal nothing about the origin of this usage. Also, do we know what grammarian first applied this taxomony?
“Nominative” in Latin means “naming”. Do we mean that the part of the sentence with this name is based on, “predicated on”, the subject of the sentence? That is, is the noun “predicate” in this usage related to the verb “predicate”?
I have always thought this an unfortunate taxomy, as it makes language learning doubly difficult -- first the language, and then these arcane names to talk about it. This after having studied three European languages plus my own.
12 comments
•
Posted in Etymology / History
Submitted by colleen • June 28, 2006
Why is “behead” the term for removing a person’s head rather than “dehead” or “unhead”?
Other words that begin with the “be-” prefix seem to be opposite in meaning to the idea of something being removed or coming off (e.g., become, begin, besmirch, befuddle, bestow, belittle).
13 comments
•
Posted in Etymology / History
