Comments on: Deceptive Compounds, Part 2 http://blog.oup.com/2010/08/deceptive-compounds/ Academic insights for the thinking world. Wed, 19 Jun 2013 15:22:49 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2 By: OUPblog » Blog Archive » Monthly Gleanings: November 2010 http://blog.oup.com/2010/08/deceptive-compounds/#comment-192301 OUPblog » Blog Archive » Monthly Gleanings: November 2010 Wed, 01 Dec 2010 13:31:41 +0000 http://blog.oup.com/?p=10486#comment-192301 [...] six Americans live… society seems to have reached such consensus.  So be it.  Our correspondent Walter Turner remarked that one American in six… would be followed by lives, and there is no doubt that he is right—a [...] [...] six Americans live… society seems to have reached such consensus.  So be it.  Our correspondent Walter Turner remarked that one American in six… would be followed by lives, and there is no doubt that he is right—a [...]

]]> By: Grossman http://blog.oup.com/2010/08/deceptive-compounds/#comment-185864 Grossman Tue, 02 Nov 2010 01:22:35 +0000 http://blog.oup.com/?p=10486#comment-185864 What catastrophic confusion? Which sentences would be confused with one another if English abandoned <i>lie</i> 'be prostrate' for <i>lay</i> altogether? As it is, we get hypercorrections like <i>I lied down</i> through confusion with <i>lie</i> 'tell a falsehood', which I have heard educated people use. As for <i>pitfall</i>, the OED2's notion that the second part is <i>fall</i> 'trap', as in OE <i>músfealle</i> 'mousetrap', ModE <i>deadfall</i> (though I do not understand its reference to <i>springfall</i> here), seems perfectly plausible to me. In which case <i>pitfall</i> 'trap making use of a pit' is an ordinary noun-noun compound, very like <i>mousetrap</i>. What catastrophic confusion? Which sentences would be confused with one another if English abandoned lie ‘be prostrate’ for lay altogether? As it is, we get hypercorrections like I lied down through confusion with lie ‘tell a falsehood’, which I have heard educated people use.

As for pitfall, the OED2′s notion that the second part is fall ‘trap’, as in OE músfealle ‘mousetrap’, ModE deadfall (though I do not understand its reference to springfall here), seems perfectly plausible to me. In which case pitfall ‘trap making use of a pit’ is an ordinary noun-noun compound, very like mousetrap.

]]> By: Dušan Vukotić http://blog.oup.com/2010/08/deceptive-compounds/#comment-168346 Dušan Vukotić Tue, 10 Aug 2010 14:36:15 +0000 http://blog.oup.com/?p=10486#comment-168346 Please, if you don't mind... another of-topic comment, now concerning bitel/a and beetle. It seems that the Slavic "counterpart" word pchela(OSl.бьчела, Russ. пчела, Serb. pčela, Cz. včela; PSl. *bike-la) shows that these words evolved from the sense of "biting" (Serb. ubod 'bite, sting, stab'). It suggests that the meaning "to beetle" (to overhang, jut) evolved consequently through the later metonymic changes. Also, as a curiosity, it appeared that pchela (pčela 'bee') is a cognate to the Slavic word bol 'pain' (OSl. боль, болѣти, Russ. боль; cf. Latin poena, penal (Gr. ποινή) vs. Slavic bol, bolno, bolan 'painful'; bolan penal - metathesis?) Please, if you don’t mind… another of-topic comment, now concerning bitel/a and beetle.
It seems that the Slavic “counterpart” word pchela(OSl.бьчела, Russ. пчела, Serb. pčela, Cz. včela; PSl. *bike-la) shows that these words evolved from the sense of “biting” (Serb. ubod ‘bite, sting, stab’). It suggests that the meaning “to beetle” (to overhang, jut) evolved consequently through the later metonymic changes.
Also, as a curiosity, it appeared that pchela (pčela ‘bee’) is a cognate to the Slavic word bol ‘pain’ (OSl. боль, болѣти, Russ. боль; cf. Latin poena, penal (Gr. ποινή) vs. Slavic bol, bolno, bolan ‘painful’; bolan penal – metathesis?)

]]> By: Dušan Vukotić http://blog.oup.com/2010/08/deceptive-compounds/#comment-168334 Dušan Vukotić Tue, 10 Aug 2010 10:18:08 +0000 http://blog.oup.com/?p=10486#comment-168334 Maybe, at this place, it would be interesting to mention the Savic words for lightning or flash, *molna- (Russ. молния, OSl. млънии, Serb. munja), Serb. munjen 'crazy' (cf. Eng. moonish, moonstricken), munuti 'to strike, hit, kick' (hence probably Lat. malleus 'mallet', Serb. malj 'mallet'; from *muhl-gn-) and, possible, mahnuti 'to wave' (Gr. μάχη 'fight', Russ. махание 'a wave of the hand') and mahnit 'crazy, mad, rabid'. Although we can here draw a semantic parallel between the words like munja 'lightning', on one side, and munuti 'strike, kick', malj 'mallet', munjen 'moonstricken, insane, moonish(?)', mahanje 'waving' and mahnit 'mad'(Lat. muto -are 'to move, change'; Serb. maknuti 'to move, shift, to change position'), on the other, it is (or seems to be) very difficult to connect all these to Slavic mesec 'moon'(OSl. мѣсѩць, Russ. месяц, Cz. mesic). If all the above-mentioned Slavic words were related to moon (mesec) it would automatically have meant that Slavic munja 'lightning, flash' would have been closely related to mesec 'moon' too. Of course, I wouldn't say that similar relation is impossible, because Slavic mesec appeared to be derived from the *men- basis, similar to Slavic verb menjati 'change, alterate'(Cz. měnit 'change', Russ. мена 'exchange', Serb. mena 'change, a phase of the moon'. Maybe, at this place, it would be interesting to mention the Savic words for lightning or flash, *molna- (Russ. молния, OSl. млънии, Serb. munja), Serb. munjen ‘crazy’ (cf. Eng. moonish, moonstricken), munuti ‘to strike, hit, kick’ (hence probably Lat. malleus ‘mallet’, Serb. malj ‘mallet’; from *muhl-gn-) and, possible, mahnuti ‘to wave’ (Gr. μάχη ‘fight’, Russ. махание ‘a wave of the hand’) and mahnit ‘crazy, mad, rabid’. Although we can here draw a semantic parallel between the words like munja ‘lightning’, on one side, and munuti ‘strike, kick’, malj ‘mallet’, munjen ‘moonstricken, insane, moonish(?)’, mahanje ‘waving’ and mahnit ‘mad’(Lat. muto -are ‘to move, change’; Serb. maknuti ‘to move, shift, to change position’), on the other, it is (or seems to be) very difficult to connect all these to Slavic mesec ‘moon’(OSl. мѣсѩць, Russ. месяц, Cz. mesic). If all the above-mentioned Slavic words were related to moon (mesec) it would automatically have meant that Slavic munja ‘lightning, flash’ would have been closely related to mesec ‘moon’ too. Of course, I wouldn’t say that similar relation is impossible, because Slavic mesec appeared to be derived from the *men- basis, similar to Slavic verb menjati ‘change, alterate’(Cz. měnit ‘change’, Russ. мена ‘exchange’, Serb. mena ‘change, a phase of the moon’.

]]> By: John Cowan http://blog.oup.com/2010/08/deceptive-compounds/#comment-168171 John Cowan Sat, 07 Aug 2010 19:14:30 +0000 http://blog.oup.com/?p=10486#comment-168171 Walter Turner: I don't insist any such thing, since it's untrue. (I can take a little inaccuracy or a little accusation, but the combination is poison.) Plenty of people still separate <i>lie</i> and <i>lay</i> — mostly including me, except for the idioms <i>lay of the land</i> and <i>lay low</i>, in which <i>lie</i> would seem old-fashioned to me. As for <i>dove</i>, it remains very much a North American variant, and nobody would call <i>dived</i> wrong either in N.A. or elsewhere. Walter Turner: I don’t insist any such thing, since it’s untrue. (I can take a little inaccuracy or a little accusation, but the combination is poison.) Plenty of people still separate lie and lay — mostly including me, except for the idioms lay of the land and lay low, in which lie would seem old-fashioned to me.

As for dove, it remains very much a North American variant, and nobody would call dived wrong either in N.A. or elsewhere.

]]> By: Walter Turner http://blog.oup.com/2010/08/deceptive-compounds/#comment-167989 Walter Turner Thu, 05 Aug 2010 13:15:36 +0000 http://blog.oup.com/?p=10486#comment-167989 John Cowan will insist that it doesn't matter, that everyone uses the word that way now, but I must still say I am astonished by the enormity of your sixth paragraph. The usage itself can't astonish anyone, but the fact that it's your usage does. Even in my youth it was not unusual to hear lay for lie. There is nevertheless an astonishing aspect to this usage, as well. That is in the fact that many people who formerly distinguished the words without thinking have gone over to the universal lay. The same is true of using dove as the past tense of dive. We wondered why our school grammars pointed out that dove was not educated usage, since no one said that. I don’t live in an English-speaking country any more, but I suspect that dived would probably be corrected to dove nowadays. What do people say for the perfect tenses now? Diven to rhyme with striven? Dive, dove, dived would make an odd set. John Cowan will insist that it doesn’t matter, that everyone uses the word that way now, but I must still say I am astonished by the enormity of your sixth paragraph. The usage itself can’t astonish anyone, but the fact that it’s your usage does.
Even in my youth it was not unusual to hear lay for lie. There is nevertheless an astonishing aspect to this usage, as well. That is in the fact that many people who formerly distinguished the words without thinking have gone over to the universal lay. The same is true of using dove as the past tense of dive. We wondered why our school grammars pointed out that dove was not educated usage, since no one said that. I don’t live in an English-speaking country any more, but I suspect that dived would probably be corrected to dove nowadays. What do people say for the perfect tenses now? Diven to rhyme with striven? Dive, dove, dived would make an odd set.

]]> By: Tweets that mention OUPblog » Blog Archive » Deceptive Compounds, Part 2 -- Topsy.com http://blog.oup.com/2010/08/deceptive-compounds/#comment-167936 Tweets that mention OUPblog » Blog Archive » Deceptive Compounds, Part 2 -- Topsy.com Wed, 04 Aug 2010 17:16:09 +0000 http://blog.oup.com/?p=10486#comment-167936 [...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by The Private Library, Lauren. Lauren said: Oh, words. You can be so deceptive sometimes. http://ow.ly/2kTxZ [...] [...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by The Private Library, Lauren. Lauren said: Oh, words. You can be so deceptive sometimes. http://ow.ly/2kTxZ [...]

]]> By: John Cowan http://blog.oup.com/2010/08/deceptive-compounds/#comment-167920 John Cowan Wed, 04 Aug 2010 13:38:13 +0000 http://blog.oup.com/?p=10486#comment-167920 What catastrophic confusion? Which sentences would be confused with one another if English abandoned <i>lie</i> 'be prostrate' for <i>lay</i> altogether? As it is, we get hypercorrections like <i>I lied down</i> through confusion with <i>lie</i> 'tell a falsehood', which I have heard educated people use. As for <i>pitfall</i>, the OED2's notion that the second part is <i>fall</i> 'trap', as in OE <i>músfealle</i> 'mousetrap', ModE <i>deadfall</i> (though I do not understand its reference to <i>springfall</i> here), seems perfectly plausible to me. In which case <i>pitfall</i> 'trap making use of a pit' is an ordinary noun-noun compound, very like <i>mousetrap</i>. What catastrophic confusion? Which sentences would be confused with one another if English abandoned lie ‘be prostrate’ for lay altogether? As it is, we get hypercorrections like I lied down through confusion with lie ‘tell a falsehood’, which I have heard educated people use.

As for pitfall, the OED2′s notion that the second part is fall ‘trap’, as in OE músfealle ‘mousetrap’, ModE deadfall (though I do not understand its reference to springfall here), seems perfectly plausible to me. In which case pitfall ‘trap making use of a pit’ is an ordinary noun-noun compound, very like mousetrap.

]]>