ETYMO es "por ende"
Ruud Harmsen
Is there an equivalent in other Romance languages?
--
Ruud Harmsen, http://rudhar.eu
Trond Engen
> Anybody know the etymology of the Spanish expression "por ende"?
> Is there an equivalent in other Romance languages?
Diccionario de la Lengua Española (<http://buscon.rae.es/draeI/>:)
ende.
(Del lat. <inde>).
1. adv. l. ant. allí (‖ en aquel lugar).
2. adv. l. ant. De allí, o de aquí.
3. adv. l. ant. De esto.
4. adv. l. ant. Más de, pasados de.
por ~.
1. loc. adv. por tanto.
--
Trond Engen
António Marques
> Anybody know the etymology of the Spanish expression "por ende"?
> Is there an equivalent in other Romance languages?
Afaict _ende_ is from latin _inde_ 'thence' but means simply 'there',
'por ende' meaning 'from/through there' -> 'thence' (cf. portuguese
_daí/daqui_ with a similar meaning: 'Daí podemos concluir que...'). The
'inde' origin is a bit strange, if you ask me.
Ruud Harmsen
sci.lang:
>Ruud Harmsen wrote:
>> Anybody know the etymology of the Spanish expression "por ende"?
>> Is there an equivalent in other Romance languages?
>
>Afaict _ende_ is from latin _inde_ 'thence' but means simply 'there',
>'por ende' meaning 'from/through there' -> 'thence' (cf. portuguese
>_da�/daqui_ with a similar meaning: 'Da� podemos concluir que...'). The
>'inde' origin is a bit strange, if you ask me.
No connection with pt ainda (earlier, in Cam�es' days: inda) I
suppose? Very different meaning. PE/Infopedia.pt is circular about
these two, so it doesn't provide an etymology:
http://www.infopedia.pt/pesquisa-global/ainda
http://www.infopedia.pt/pesquisa-global/inda
António Marques
> Mon, 09 Nov 2009 18:21:47 +0000: António Marques<m....@sapo.pt>: in
> sci.lang:
>
>> Ruud Harmsen wrote:
>>> Anybody know the etymology of the Spanish expression "por ende"?
>>> Is there an equivalent in other Romance languages?
>>
>> Afaict _ende_ is from latin _inde_ 'thence' but means simply 'there',
>> 'por ende' meaning 'from/through there' -> 'thence' (cf. portuguese
>> 'inde' origin is a bit strange, if you ask me.
>
Oh, it's still 'inda' most of the times...
> I
> suppose? Very different meaning. PE/Infopedia.pt is circular about
> these two, so it doesn't provide an etymology:
>
> http://www.infopedia.pt/pesquisa-global/ainda
> http://www.infopedia.pt/pesquisa-global/inda
The only etymology I know about (I'll let you know if I find another
one) is 'ad + inde + ad', which is plain weird. As is the proposed 'ad
huc' for spanish 'aún'. Not as phonetics are concerned (plenty of latin
-c words end up with a nasal in portuguese, so why not spanish...), but
when the semantics makes no sense *and* the phonetics could be anything
(not to mention that that final '+ad' makes no syntatic sense)...
Ruud Harmsen
sci.lang:
>Ruud Harmsen wrote:
>> Mon, 09 Nov 2009 18:21:47 +0000: Ant�nio Marques<m....@sapo.pt>: in
>> sci.lang:
>>
>>> Ruud Harmsen wrote:
>>>> Anybody know the etymology of the Spanish expression "por ende"?
>>>> Is there an equivalent in other Romance languages?
>>>
>>> Afaict _ende_ is from latin _inde_ 'thence' but means simply 'there',
>>> 'por ende' meaning 'from/through there' -> 'thence' (cf. portuguese
>>> _da�/daqui_ with a similar meaning: 'Da� podemos concluir que...'). The
>>> 'inde' origin is a bit strange, if you ask me.
>>
>> No connection with pt ainda (earlier, in Cam�es' days: inda)
>
>Oh, it's still 'inda' most of the times...
Also in written language? Never seen that.
John Atkinson
"ende" by itself):
"... certain authors and later mss later also used _ende_ as substitute
for _i_, with the meaning 'alli'; this was helped by the use of
_por_ende_ 'por esto', 'por lo mismo', where it comes from the Latin
PROINDE, it occasionally also takes the meaning 'por alli' ("caecio' que
paseron por ende un dia tres piscadoes", Calila (1251))". In its basic
meaning the phrase _por_ende_ survived _ende_ adverb of place, and is
found not only in the Danza de la Muerte of around 1400, in APal, and in
Nebrija (1495 or 1493), but in later authors, and some archaising
writers employ it still today."
John.
Harlan Messinger
> Ruud Harmsen wrote:
>> Mon, 09 Nov 2009 18:21:47 +0000: António Marques<m....@sapo.pt>: in
>> sci.lang:
>>
>>> Ruud Harmsen wrote:
>>>> Anybody know the etymology of the Spanish expression "por ende"?
>>>> Is there an equivalent in other Romance languages?
>>>
>>> Afaict _ende_ is from latin _inde_ 'thence' but means simply 'there',
>>> 'por ende' meaning 'from/through there' -> 'thence' (cf. portuguese
>>> _daí/daqui_ with a similar meaning: 'Daí podemos concluir que...'). The
>>> 'inde' origin is a bit strange, if you ask me.
>>
>> No connection with pt ainda (earlier, in Camões' days: inda)
>
> Oh, it's still 'inda' most of the times...
>
>> I
>> suppose? Very different meaning. PE/Infopedia.pt is circular about
>> these two, so it doesn't provide an etymology:
>>
>> http://www.infopedia.pt/pesquisa-global/ainda
>> http://www.infopedia.pt/pesquisa-global/inda
>
> The only etymology I know about (I'll let you know if I find another
> one) is 'ad + inde + ad', which is plain weird. As is the proposed 'ad
> huc' for spanish 'aún'.
I see the RAE dictionary mentions "adhuc" and maybe that it what it was
in Iberian Vulgar Latin, but in Classic Latin, the
masculine/feminine/neuter accusative (which is what was used with "ad")
were hunc, hanc, hoc, and "?ad hunc" would explain the nasal.
> Not as phonetics are concerned (plenty of latin
> -c words end up with a nasal in portuguese, so why not spanish...),
Other examples?
Ekkehard Dengler
> Mon, 09 Nov 2009 19:08:34 +0000: Ant�nio Marques <m....@sapo.pt>: in
> sci.lang:
>
>> Ruud Harmsen wrote:
>>> Mon, 09 Nov 2009 18:21:47 +0000: Ant�nio Marques<m....@sapo.pt>: in
>>> sci.lang:
>>>
>>>> Ruud Harmsen wrote:
>>>>> Anybody know the etymology of the Spanish expression "por ende"?
>>>>> Is there an equivalent in other Romance languages?
>>>>
>>>> Afaict _ende_ is from latin _inde_ 'thence' but means simply
>>>> 'there', 'por ende' meaning 'from/through there' -> 'thence' (cf.
>>>> portuguese _da�/daqui_ with a similar meaning: 'Da� podemos
>>>> concluir que...'). The 'inde' origin is a bit strange, if you ask
>>>> me.
>>>
>>> No connection with pt ainda (earlier, in Cam�es' days: inda)
>>
>> Oh, it's still 'inda' most of the times...
>
> Also in written language?
No. Nor for that matter in educated non-regional speech.
Regards,
Ekkehard
António Marques
> Mon, 09 Nov 2009 19:08:34 +0000: António Marques <m...@sapo.pt>: in
> sci.lang:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >Ruud Harmsen wrote:
> >> Mon, 09 Nov 2009 18:21:47 +0000: António Marques<m...@sapo.pt>: in
> >> sci.lang:
>
> >>> Ruud Harmsen wrote:
> >>>> Anybody know the etymology of the Spanish expression "por ende"?
> >>>> Is there an equivalent in other Romance languages?
>
> >>> Afaict _ende_ is from latin _inde_ 'thence' but means simply 'there',
> >>> 'por ende' meaning 'from/through there' -> 'thence' (cf. portuguese
> >>> 'inde' origin is a bit strange, if you ask me.
>
>
> >Oh, it's still 'inda' most of the times...
>
> Also in written language? Never seen that.
No, not written (in Camoes's time the distance between written and
spoken may have been smaller), but it's what you frequently find
colloquially (try to be on the lookout for 'inda bem', for instance).
Not as dominant as 'tar' for 'estar', but certainly much more than
'atão' for 'então' (this one will stand out, whereas the others won't
be noticed unless formal speech is expected).
António Marques
> >> sci.lang:
>
> >>> Ruud Harmsen wrote:
> >>>> Anybody know the etymology of the Spanish expression "por ende"?
> >>>> Is there an equivalent in other Romance languages?
>
> >>> Afaict _ende_ is from latin _inde_ 'thence' but means simply 'there',
> >>> 'por ende' meaning 'from/through there' -> 'thence' (cf. portuguese
> >>> _daí/daqui_ with a similar meaning: 'Daí podemos concluir que...'). The
> >>> 'inde' origin is a bit strange, if you ask me.
>
> >> No connection with pt ainda (earlier, in Camões' days: inda)
>
> > Oh, it's still 'inda' most of the times...
>
> >> I
> >> suppose? Very different meaning. PE/Infopedia.pt is circular about
> >> these two, so it doesn't provide an etymology:
>
> >>http://www.infopedia.pt/pesquisa-global/ainda
> >>http://www.infopedia.pt/pesquisa-global/inda
>
> > The only etymology I know about (I'll let you know if I find another
> > one) is 'ad + inde + ad', which is plain weird. As is the proposed 'ad
> > huc' for spanish 'aún'.
>
> I see the RAE dictionary mentions "adhuc" and maybe that it what it was
> in Iberian Vulgar Latin, but in Classic Latin, the
> masculine/feminine/neuter accusative (which is what was used with "ad")
> were hunc, hanc, hoc, and "?ad hunc" would explain the nasal.
Yeah, the nasal is not a problem per se, but nor does it give extra
confidence.
> > Not as phonetics are concerned (plenty of latin
> > -c words end up with a nasal in portuguese, so why not spanish...),
>
> Other examples?
sic -> sim, nec -> nem... it's not like there's a whole boatload of -c
words in latin, come to think of it. But they've made me wonder for a
long time now if -c and -nc weren't the latin way of writing [N].
Ruud Harmsen
<ent...@gmail.com>: in sci.lang:
>sic -> sim, nec -> nem... it's not like there's a whole boatload of -c
>words in latin, come to think of it. But they've made me wonder for a
>long time now if -c and -nc weren't the latin way of writing [N].
Interesting idea. Cf. gamma-gamma and gamma-kappa in Greek.
If so, why are -c and -nc different in "hic et nunc"?
OTOH, the modern Portuguese word "assim" points in the direction of a
much later addition of the nasal than in Latin times:
Latin ad sic, Spanish as�, but also still assi in Cam�es' Portuguese.
(Pity they usually "correct" such things in modern editions. An
original can be seen here: http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/27236 .)
Note that in addition to Spanish, French too has a word "si" (as an
extra affirmative form of "oui"), without a nasal.
Is French ainsi (with the nasal in a different place!) also from Latin
ad sic?
Harlan Messinger
> On Nov 10, 12:58 am, Harlan Messinger
> <hmessinger.removet...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>> Ruud Harmsen wrote:
>>>> sci.lang:
>>>>> Ruud Harmsen wrote:
>>>>>> Anybody know the etymology of the Spanish expression "por ende"?
>>>>>> Is there an equivalent in other Romance languages?
>>>>> Afaict _ende_ is from latin _inde_ 'thence' but means simply 'there',
>>>>> 'por ende' meaning 'from/through there' -> 'thence' (cf. portuguese
>>>>> 'inde' origin is a bit strange, if you ask me.
>>> Oh, it's still 'inda' most of the times...
>>>> I
>>>> suppose? Very different meaning. PE/Infopedia.pt is circular about
>>>> these two, so it doesn't provide an etymology:
>>>> http://www.infopedia.pt/pesquisa-global/ainda
>>>> http://www.infopedia.pt/pesquisa-global/inda
>>> The only etymology I know about (I'll let you know if I find another
>>> one) is 'ad + inde + ad', which is plain weird. As is the proposed 'ad
>> I see the RAE dictionary mentions "adhuc" and maybe that it what it was
>> in Iberian Vulgar Latin, but in Classic Latin, the
>> masculine/feminine/neuter accusative (which is what was used with "ad")
>> were hunc, hanc, hoc, and "?ad hunc" would explain the nasal.
>
> Yeah, the nasal is not a problem per se, but nor does it give extra
> confidence.
>
>>> Not as phonetics are concerned (plenty of latin
>>> -c words end up with a nasal in portuguese, so why not spanish...),
>> Other examples?
>
> sic -> sim, nec -> nem... it's not like there's a whole boatload of -c
> words in latin, come to think of it. But they've made me wonder for a
> long time now if -c and -nc weren't the latin way of writing [N].
An intriguing idea, but then an explanation for the diversity of
spellings among the forms of "hic" would be necessary: hic haec hoc but
hunc hanc.
António Marques
> António Marques wrote:
>> On Nov 10, 12:58 am, Harlan Messinger
>> <hmessinger.removet...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>> Not as phonetics are concerned (plenty of latin
>>>> -c words end up with a nasal in portuguese, so why not spanish...),
>>> Other examples?
>>
>> sic -> sim, nec -> nem... it's not like there's a whole boatload of -c
>> words in latin, come to think of it. But they've made me wonder for a
>> long time now if -c and -nc weren't the latin way of writing [N].
>
> An intriguing idea, but then an explanation for the diversity of
> spellings among the forms of "hic" would be necessary: hic haec hoc but
> hunc hanc.
That's why I've only been wondering.
But the diversity of spellings, I think, could be a literary artifact -
as in, we don't quite know how to write this anyway, so let's fixate
these forms with -c and those with -nc - it might even have been useful
so as to distinguish in writing things which were equal in speech.
António Marques
Well, and guess what: _inde_ may be the etymon of the 'en' partitive one
finds in fr, oc, cat, etc.
António Marques
> Tue, 10 Nov 2009 15:50:08 -0800 (PST): António Marques
> <ent...@gmail.com>: in sci.lang:
>
>> sic -> sim, nec -> nem... it's not like there's a whole boatload of -c
>> words in latin, come to think of it. But they've made me wonder for a
>> long time now if -c and -nc weren't the latin way of writing [N].
>
> Interesting idea. Cf. gamma-gamma and gamma-kappa in Greek.
>
> If so, why are -c and -nc different in "hic et nunc"?
Uncertainty on how to spell such a sound, dialectal variation which the
written language took advantage of, a slightly different version of [N]
(possibly analyzable as /nN/), who knows. Or maybe there's just nothing
to it.
> OTOH, the modern Portuguese word "assim" points in the direction of a
> much later addition of the nasal than in Latin times:
> Latin ad sic, Spanish así, but also still assi in Camões' Portuguese.
Yes, and 'outrossi'. I can't get my hands on a medieval text that has
examples of the standalone 'sim', just to check - all the _si_ I can
find are instances of the modern 'se'. (There's also a modern 'si', the
reflex of latin _sibi_.)
But the present nasality must have come from somewhere:
- it may always have been there but unnotated; or just how well does
i-tilde stand out?
- for some reason, I don't feel that the nasality is there as some kind
of averb marker (as -es can be in galician: mentres, 'a pesares', but
oddly 'simple')
- galician has si, asi, but nin/nen - and galician actually nasalises
the -i of the preterite S1: vin, partin, comin, fuxin..., which are a
large part of the total -i occurrences.
Why would a nasality develop out of the blue in portuguese, and only in
words which had -c in latin? What about the -n in spanish 'ningún'?
> (Pity they usually "correct" such things in modern editions. An
> original can be seen here: http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/27236 .)
>
> Note that in addition to Spanish, French too has a word "si" (as an
> extra affirmative form of "oui"), without a nasal.
>
> Is French ainsi (with the nasal in a different place!) also from Latin
> ad sic?
I think is from _in sic_, whatever sense that makes.
We may simply come to the conclusion that the history of such romance
adverbs is a complete mess.
Harlan Messinger
Can any of this be explained any more readily if we postulate Latin
final /k/ > /g/ > /N/? Then, in Spanish, final /iN/ > /i/ ("sí", "así")
and final /uN/ > /un/ ("aun"), while inside /niN/ + /un/ it remained
/N/, giving "ningún"? And in Portuguese, final /iN/ > /i~/, and then
there's "nenhum".
Harlan Messinger
Oh, look! In the Trésor de la langue française informatisé (TLFi), under
"si(3), adv.": "Étymol. et Hist. Affirm. (valeur issue de l'adv. de
manière) 1. ca 1050 introd. un second impér. dans une phrase jussive (St
Alexis, éd. Chr. Storey, 220: Quar me herberges pur Deu an ta maison
[...]; Tut soi amferm ***sim*** pais pur sue amor)"
Under "ainsi" (for which they say the origin of the "ain" part is
controversial): "Étymol. ET HIST. 1. Adv. XIe s. ensi « de cette façon
» (La Vie de Saint-Alexis, éd. G. Paris, 271 : Iluec converset ensi dis
e set anz); 1155 ainsins « id. » (WACE, Conception Nostre Dame, p. 41,
Mancel et Trébutien ds GDF., s.v. issi : ***Ainsins*** m'aviegne con tu
diz)". They go on to say, "Forme ainsin par nasalisation de l'i final
sous l'influence de la syllabe précédente" but given that final "m" in
"sim" as well, I wonder whether they just aren't paying attention to the
common pattern and are making up a reason for "ainsin" instead.
Ruud Harmsen
sci.lang:
>Why would a nasality develop out of the blue in portuguese, and only in
>words which had -c in latin?
M�e versus madre?
>What about the -n in spanish 'ning�n'?
Pt nenhum. No nasal in Latin?
>We may simply come to the conclusion that the history of such romance
>adverbs is a complete mess.
Complicated, yes, at the least.
Harlan Messinger
> Fri, 13 Nov 2009 16:03:59 +0000: Ant�nio Marques <m....@sapo.pt>: in
> sci.lang:
>
>> Why would a nasality develop out of the blue in portuguese, and only in
>> words which had -c in latin?
>
> M�e versus madre?
>
>> What about the -n in spanish 'ning�n'?
>
> Pt nenhum. No nasal in Latin?
Nec + unus
António Marques
> Fri, 13 Nov 2009 16:03:59 +0000: António Marques<m....@sapo.pt>: in
> sci.lang:
>
>> Why would a nasality develop out of the blue in portuguese, and only in
>> words which had -c in latin?
>
I actually don't know the etymology of _mãe_, or _pai_ for that matter.
Nor why _mãe_ became _nai_ in most of galician.
>> What about the -n in spanish 'ningún'?
>
> Pt nenhum. No nasal in Latin?
Here I was pointing out that even in spanish _nec_ appears with a nasal.
I should have written '-n-' or '-ng-'.
Just yesterday I *think* I heard Jack Bauer say ['wUr&v] for "would've".
Ruud Harmsen
sci.lang:
>> M�e versus madre?
>
>I actually don't know the etymology of _m�e_, or _pai_ for that matter.
>Nor why _m�e_ became _nai_ in most of galician.
Latin patre, matre. So why did in become so different? Spanish: padre,
madre.
Harlan Messinger
An understandable slip of the tongue, for someone who's perennially
tense and sleep-deprived.
Harlan Messinger
> Sat, 14 Nov 2009 15:06:44 +0000: Ant�nio Marques <m....@sapo.pt>: in
> sci.lang:
>
>>> M�e versus madre?
>> I actually don't know the etymology of _m�e_, or _pai_ for that matter.
>> Nor why _m�e_ became _nai_ in most of galician.
>
> Latin patre, matre. So why did in become so different? Spanish: padre,
> madre.
Isn't it mama > (ma)m�e, papa > (pa)pai?
António Marques
> Sat, 14 Nov 2009 15:06:44 +0000: António Marques<m....@sapo.pt>: in
> sci.lang:
>
>>> Mãe versus madre?
>>
>> I actually don't know the etymology of _mãe_, or _pai_ for that matter.
>> Nor why _mãe_ became _nai_ in most of galician.
>
> Latin patre, matre. So why did in become so different? Spanish: padre,
> madre.
Mater and pater are the etyma of _madre_ and _padre_. Again, I do not
know the etyma of _mãe_ or _pai_.
Ruud Harmsen
sci.lang:
>Ruud Harmsen wrote:
>> Sat, 14 Nov 2009 15:06:44 +0000: Ant�nio Marques<m....@sapo.pt>: in
>> sci.lang:
>>
>>>> M�e versus madre?
>>>
>>> I actually don't know the etymology of _m�e_, or _pai_ for that matter.
>>> Nor why _m�e_ became _nai_ in most of galician.
>>
>> Latin patre, matre. So why did in become so different? Spanish: padre,
>> madre.
>
>Mater and pater are the etyma of _madre_ and _padre_. Again, I do not
>know the etyma of _m�e_ or _pai_.
Actually, I quoted Porto Editora. So if was lying, I was lying in
commission. The info is also online at:
http://www.infopedia.pt/pesquisa-global/pai
http://www.infopedia.pt/pesquisa-global/m�e
António Marques
> Mon, 16 Nov 2009 11:56:43 +0000: António Marques<m....@sapo.pt>: in
> sci.lang:
>
>> Ruud Harmsen wrote:
>>> Sat, 14 Nov 2009 15:06:44 +0000: António Marques<m....@sapo.pt>: in
>>> sci.lang:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I actually don't know the etymology of _mãe_, or _pai_ for that matter.
>>>> Nor why _mãe_ became _nai_ in most of galician.
>>>
>>> Latin patre, matre. So why did in become so different? Spanish: padre,
>>> madre.
>>
>> Mater and pater are the etyma of _madre_ and _padre_. Again, I do not
>
> Actually, I quoted Porto Editora. So if was lying, I was lying in
> commission. The info is also online at:
> http://www.infopedia.pt/pesquisa-global/pai
I didn't say you were lying.
However convenient it might be, the fact is that those portuguese words
aren't derivable from the latin ones. Of course, there may be a
connection between them, but not phonetic descent.
Ekkehard Dengler
> Ruud Harmsen wrote:
>>>
>>> I actually don't know the etymology of _m�e_, or _pai_ for that
>>> matter. Nor why _m�e_ became _nai_ in most of galician.
>>
>> Latin patre, matre. So why did in become so different? Spanish:
>> padre, madre.
>
> Mater and pater are the etyma of _madre_ and _padre_.
That doesn't mean they can't be where "m�e" and "pai" come from, though.
Regards,
Ekkehard
Harlan Messinger
(Waving for attention since no notice seems to have been made of my
earlier suggestion, which I *realize* might mean that it was rejected,
but just in case it was just overlooked): Isn't it mama > (ma)m�e, papa
> (pa)pai?
And, by the way, French has a corresponding arrangement: maman (nasal
terminal vowel), papa (non-nasal terminal vowel).
Trond Engen
> Ekkehard Dengler wrote:
>
>> Ant�nio Marques wrote:
>>
>>> Ruud Harmsen wrote:
>>>
>>>> Sat, 14 Nov 2009 15:06:44 +0000: Ant�nio Marques<m....@sapo.pt>: in
>>>> sci.lang:
>>>>
>>>>>> M�e versus madre?
>>>>>
>>>>> I actually don't know the etymology of _m�e_, or _pai_ for that
>>>>> matter. Nor why _m�e_ became _nai_ in most of galician.
>>>>
>>>> Latin patre, matre. So why did in become so different? Spanish:
>>>> padre, madre.
>>>
>>> Mater and pater are the etyma of _madre_ and _padre_.
>>
>> That doesn't mean they can't be where "m�e" and "pai" come from,
>> though.
>
> (Waving for attention since no notice seems to have been made of my
> earlier suggestion, which I *realize* might mean that it was
> rejected, but just in case it was just overlooked): Isn't it mama >
> (ma)m�e, papa > (pa)pai?
>
> And, by the way, French has a corresponding arrangement: maman (nasal
> terminal vowel), papa (non-nasal terminal vowel).
I thought I posted a message an hour or two ago where I ventured to
guess that they are nursery words based on 'madre' and 'padre' and
speculated that the /i/ was lowered to /e/ by the nasal.
--
Trond Engen
Harlan Messinger
I'm assuming that mama/maman/mamma/(ma)m�e and papa/papa/pappa/(pa)pai
didn't come come from "madre" or "padre" or the corresponding words in
any other modern Romance language since all the Romance languages that I
know have these familiar forms and therefore probably came into Romance
that way. I agree with you about that last part.
Ruud Harmsen
sci.lang:
>Ruud Harmsen wrote:
>> Mon, 16 Nov 2009 11:56:43 +0000: Ant�nio Marques<m....@sapo.pt>: in
>> sci.lang:
>>
>>> Ruud Harmsen wrote:
>>>> Sat, 14 Nov 2009 15:06:44 +0000: Ant�nio Marques<m....@sapo.pt>: in
>>>> sci.lang:
>>>>
>>>>>> M�e versus madre?
>>>>>
>>>>> I actually don't know the etymology of _m�e_, or _pai_ for that matter.
>>>>> Nor why _m�e_ became _nai_ in most of galician.
>>>>
>>>> Latin patre, matre. So why did in become so different? Spanish: padre,
>>>> madre.
>>>
>>> Mater and pater are the etyma of _madre_ and _padre_. Again, I do not
>>> know the etyma of _m�e_ or _pai_.
>>
>> Actually, I quoted Porto Editora. So if was lying, I was lying in
>> commission. The info is also online at:
>> http://www.infopedia.pt/pesquisa-global/pai
>> http://www.infopedia.pt/pesquisa-global/m�e
>
>I didn't say you were lying.
You're right, I didn't say that or shouldn't have suggested that maybe
you did, because you didn't.
>However convenient it might be, the fact is that those portuguese words
>aren't derivable from the latin ones. Of course, there may be a
>connection between them, but not phonetic descent.
You're probably right, as ever.
Ruud Harmsen
<hmessinger...@comcast.net>: in sci.lang:
>I'm assuming that mama/maman/mamma/(ma)m�e and papa/papa/pappa/(pa)pai
>didn't come come from "madre" or "padre" or the corresponding words in
>any other modern Romance language since all the Romance languages that I
>know have these familiar forms and therefore probably came into Romance
>that way. I agree with you about that last part.
And so have non-Romance languages like Germanic ones, if not almost
all languages in the world. One theory is it has to do with labials
being very basic phoneticly and so among the first sound learnt by
babies.
Ruud Harmsen
sci.lang:
>And so have non-Romance languages like Germanic ones, if not almost
>all languages in the world. One theory is it has to do with labials
>being very basic phoneticly and so among the first sound learnt by
>babies.
Soundzzzzzzzz, that is. Sounds.
Harlan Messinger
developed from scratch all over again in Spanish AND in Portuguese AND
in French AND in Italian, as opposed to them all having come from Latin
"mama", "papa".
Trond Engen
I agree that they didn't develop independently, but I don't think the
phonology allows you to posit direct descent in all the languages. The
current forms are rather results of (consecutive) borrowing, originating
in Medieval Italian or Proven�al or something.
The question then is whether the forms are inherited directly from Latin
into the intermediate host language or they were coined anew as nursery
words from (the descendants of) <ma:ter> and <pa:ter>. I favoured the
latter, since the corresponding Latin constructions are inherited in the
modern languages with old technical meanings. However, my Latin
dictionary seems to have "mother" as a secondary meaning of <mamma>
"breast". Even <pap(p)as> "educator, tutor; pope" could easily have been
(re?-)extended under influence of <mamma>.
But, obviously, I'm no Latinist.
--
Trond Engen
Harlan Messinger
I don't understand the motivation for assuming these *lost* the existing
"mamma" and "pappa" only to derive them all over again. And if they did
derive them, it's quite a coincidence that they came out the same as
they were in Latin, given the variety of alternatives found in other
languages with similar "baby-talk" names for one's parents (dada, nene,
babu, etc).
António Marques
> Ekkehard Dengler wrote:
>> António Marques wrote:
>>> Ruud Harmsen wrote:
>>>>> I actually don't know the etymology of _mãe_, or _pai_ for that
>>>>> matter. Nor why _mãe_ became _nai_ in most of galician.
>>>> Latin patre, matre. So why did in become so different? Spanish:
>>>> padre, madre.
>>> Mater and pater are the etyma of _madre_ and _padre_.
>>
'Where they come from', if determinable at all, is not the relevant part
unless it turns out to be a convincing regular development. 'The
etymolgy of' means the whole process, and if indeed _mater_ is where
'mãe' comes from then 99% of 'the etymology' is finding out the *how* -
and that is unknown.
> (Waving for attention since no notice seems to have been made of my
> earlier suggestion, which I *realize* might mean that it was rejected,
> but just in case it was just overlooked): Isn't it mama > (ma)mãe, papa
> > (pa)pai?
>
> And, by the way, French has a corresponding arrangement: maman (nasal
> terminal vowel), papa (non-nasal terminal vowel).
The reason I didn't answer your suggestion was that 1) I don't know and
2) just for what reason pt has adopted those two as neutral words for
'mother' and 'father' is what's intriguing.
António Marques
> Harlan Messinger:
>
>> Ruud Harmsen wrote:
>>
>>> Mon, 16 Nov 2009 15:26:33 -0500: Harlan Messinger
>>> <hmessinger...@comcast.net>: in sci.lang:
>>>
>>>> papa/papa/pappa/(pa)pai didn't come come from "madre" or "padre" or
>>>> the corresponding words in any other modern Romance language since
>>>> all the Romance languages that I know have these familiar forms and
>>>> therefore probably came into Romance that way. I agree with you
>>>> about that last part.
>>>
>>> And so have non-Romance languages like Germanic ones, if not almost
>>> all languages in the world. One theory is it has to do with labials
>>> being very basic phoneticly and so among the first sound learnt by
>>> babies.
>>
>> That's fine, but nevertheless it's extremely unlikely that they
>> developed from scratch all over again in Spanish AND in Portuguese AND
>> in French AND in Italian, as opposed to them all having come from
>> Latin "mama", "papa".
>
> I agree that they didn't develop independently, but I don't think the
> phonology allows you to posit direct descent in all the languages. The
> current forms are rather results of (consecutive) borrowing, originating
>
> The question then is whether the forms are inherited directly from Latin
> into the intermediate host language or they were coined anew as nursery
> words from (the descendants of) <ma:ter> and <pa:ter>.
But the odd thing about portuguese is that mãe and pai are the neutral
words. Madre and padre once had the same meaning, but nowadays both are
exclusively ecclesiastical: madre = [higher rank] nun, padre = priest.
In particular, madre and padre can never have the neutral meanings
'female parent' and 'male parent'.
> I favoured the
> latter, since the corresponding Latin constructions are inherited in the
> modern languages with old technical meanings. However, my Latin
> dictionary seems to have "mother" as a secondary meaning of <mamma>
> "breast". Even <pap(p)as> "educator, tutor; pope" could easily have been
> (re?-)extended under influence of <mamma>.
Mamma quite naturally developed into pt mama ['m@m@]. Mãe [m@~j] can
hardly be confused with it. Nor brazilian mamãe [ma'm@~j] (would be
[m@'m@~j], br [@] is noticeably backer / more closed than pt). Pt mamã
[m@'m@~] still doesn't come very close; stress is quite important. (I
*think* the latter came from french.)
Harlan Messinger
Well, that happens. "Mom" and "dad", as it happens, are rapidly
replacing "mother" and "father" in US English.
> Madre and padre once had the same meaning, but nowadays both are
> exclusively ecclesiastical: madre = [higher rank] nun, padre = priest.
> In particular, madre and padre can never have the neutral meanings
> 'female parent' and 'male parent'.
>
>> I favoured the
>> latter, since the corresponding Latin constructions are inherited in the
>> modern languages with old technical meanings. However, my Latin
>> dictionary seems to have "mother" as a secondary meaning of <mamma>
>> "breast". Even <pap(p)as> "educator, tutor; pope" could easily have been
>> (re?-)extended under influence of <mamma>.
>
> Mamma quite naturally developed into pt mama ['m@m@]. Mãe [m@~j] can
> hardly be confused with it. Nor brazilian mamãe [ma'm@~j] (would be
> [m@'m@~j], br [@] is noticeably backer / more closed than pt). Pt mamã
> [m@'m@~] still doesn't come very close; stress is quite important. (I
> *think* the latter came from french.)
I think the final /j/ could easily have been added as a diminutive or
endearment, comparable to Spanish "mami", "papi".
António Marques
Aright, but such that in a few centuries "mother" and "father" would
simply make no sense at all if used with their curent meanings?
>
>> Madre and padre once had the same meaning, but nowadays both are
>> exclusively ecclesiastical: madre = [higher rank] nun, padre = priest.
>> In particular, madre and padre can never have the neutral meanings
>> 'female parent' and 'male parent'.
>>
>>> I favoured the
>>> latter, since the corresponding Latin constructions are inherited in the
>>> modern languages with old technical meanings. However, my Latin
>>> dictionary seems to have "mother" as a secondary meaning of <mamma>
>>> "breast". Even <pap(p)as> "educator, tutor; pope" could easily have been
>>> (re?-)extended under influence of <mamma>.
>>
>> Mamma quite naturally developed into pt mama ['m@m@]. Mãe [m@~j] can
>> hardly be confused with it. Nor brazilian mamãe [ma'm@~j] (would be
>> [m@'m@~j], br [@] is noticeably backer / more closed than pt). Pt mamã
>> [m@'m@~] still doesn't come very close; stress is quite important. (I
>> *think* the latter came from french.)
>
> I think the final /j/ could easily have been added as a diminutive or
> endearment, comparable to Spanish "mami", "papi".
That's certainly possible; it would allow the development to be
apheresis of ma-/pa- rather than reduplication (at any rate *mã > mamã >
mamãe > mãe rather than parallel *mã > mãe > mamãe and *mã > mamã). You
do find 'mainha', a diminutive, in a lot of places.
Harlan Messinger
I'm not psychic, but why not? "Mistress" was replaced by its abbreviated
form "Mrs." ("missuz") so long ago that it's been generations since
anyone could have referred to a Mrs. Smith as Mistress Smith, even
though "mistress" remains a word in modern English.
>
>>
>>> Madre and padre once had the same meaning, but nowadays both are
>>> exclusively ecclesiastical: madre = [higher rank] nun, padre = priest.
>>> In particular, madre and padre can never have the neutral meanings
>>> 'female parent' and 'male parent'.
>>>
>>>> I favoured the
>>>> latter, since the corresponding Latin constructions are inherited in
>>>> the
>>>> modern languages with old technical meanings. However, my Latin
>>>> dictionary seems to have "mother" as a secondary meaning of <mamma>
>>>> "breast". Even <pap(p)as> "educator, tutor; pope" could easily have
>>>> been
>>>> (re?-)extended under influence of <mamma>.
>>>
>>> Mamma quite naturally developed into pt mama ['m@m@]. Mãe [m@~j] can
>>> hardly be confused with it. Nor brazilian mamãe [ma'm@~j] (would be
>>> [m@'m@~j], br [@] is noticeably backer / more closed than pt). Pt mamã
>>> [m@'m@~] still doesn't come very close; stress is quite important. (I
>>> *think* the latter came from french.)
>>
>> I think the final /j/ could easily have been added as a diminutive or
>> endearment, comparable to Spanish "mami", "papi".
>
> That's certainly possible; it would allow the development to be
> apheresis of ma-/pa- rather than reduplication (at any rate *mã > mamã >
> mamãe > mãe rather than parallel *mã > mãe > mamãe and *mã > mamã). You
> do find 'mainha', a diminutive, in a lot of places.
I did figure on apheresis, but only because I know "mamãe" courtesy of
Carmen Miranda ("Mamãe, eu quero"). Come to think of it, that song IS
about sucking at the teat, isn't it? (I wonder whether American movie
goers in the 1940s had any idea that's what she was singing about.)
Ekkehard Dengler
> Harlan Messinger wrote:
>> Well, that happens. "Mom" and "dad", as it happens, are rapidly
>> replacing "mother" and "father" in US English.
>
> Aright, but such that in a few centuries "mother" and "father" would
> simply make no sense at all if used with their curent meanings?
That's certainly possible. The speed of language change is no more
predictable than its direction.
Regards,
Ekkehard
Ekkehard Dengler
> Trond Engen wrote:
>> Harlan Messinger:
>>
>>> Ruud Harmsen wrote:
>>>
>>>> Mon, 16 Nov 2009 15:26:33 -0500: Harlan Messinger
>>>> <hmessinger...@comcast.net>: in sci.lang:
>>>>
>>>>> papa/papa/pappa/(pa)pai didn't come come from "madre" or "padre"
>>>>> or the corresponding words in any other modern Romance language
>>>>> since all the Romance languages that I know have these familiar
>>>>> forms and therefore probably came into Romance that way. I agree
>>>>> with you about that last part.
>>>>
>>>> And so have non-Romance languages like Germanic ones, if not almost
>>>> all languages in the world. One theory is it has to do with labials
>>>> being very basic phoneticly and so among the first sound learnt by
>>>> babies.
>>>
>>> That's fine, but nevertheless it's extremely unlikely that they
>>> developed from scratch all over again in Spanish AND in Portuguese
>>> AND in French AND in Italian, as opposed to them all having come
>>> from Latin "mama", "papa".
>>
>> I agree that they didn't develop independently, but I don't think the
>> phonology allows you to posit direct descent in all the languages.
>> The current forms are rather results of (consecutive) borrowing,
>>
>> The question then is whether the forms are inherited directly from
>> Latin into the intermediate host language or they were coined anew
>> as nursery words from (the descendants of) <ma:ter> and <pa:ter>.
>
> words. Madre and padre once had the same meaning, but nowadays both
> are exclusively ecclesiastical: madre = [higher rank] nun, padre =
> priest. In particular, madre and padre can never have the neutral
> meanings 'female parent' and 'male parent'.
These meanings could be said to live on in the words "comadre", "compadre",
"madrinha" and "padrinho", though.
Regards,
Ekkehard
Ekkehard Dengler
> Harlan Messinger wrote:
>> Ekkehard Dengler wrote:
>>>> Ruud Harmsen wrote:
>>>>> sci.lang:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> M�e versus madre?
>>>>>> I actually don't know the etymology of _m�e_, or _pai_ for that
>>>>>> matter. Nor why _m�e_ became _nai_ in most of galician.
>>>>> Latin patre, matre. So why did in become so different? Spanish:
>>>>> padre, madre.
>>>> Mater and pater are the etyma of _madre_ and _padre_.
>>>
>>> though.
>
> 'Where they come from', if determinable at all, is not the relevant
> part unless it turns out to be a convincing regular development. 'The
> etymolgy of' means the whole process, and if indeed _mater_ is where
> - and that is unknown.
I just wanted to point out that the etymology of "madre" and "padre" is
irrelevant to that of "m�e" and "pai". Both "artelho" and "artigo" derive
from Lat. "articulus", for instance.
Regards,
Ekkehard
António Marques
> António Marques wrote:
>> Harlan Messinger wrote:
>>> António Marques wrote:
>>>> But the odd thing about portuguese is that mãe and pai are the neutral
>>>> words.
>>>
>>> Well, that happens. "Mom" and "dad", as it happens, are rapidly
>>> replacing "mother" and "father" in US English.
>>
>> Aright, but such that in a few centuries "mother" and "father" would
>> simply make no sense at all if used with their curent meanings?
>
> I'm not psychic, but why not? "Mistress" was replaced by its abbreviated
> form "Mrs." ("missuz") so long ago that it's been generations since
> anyone could have referred to a Mrs. Smith as Mistress Smith, even
> though "mistress" remains a word in modern English.
Well, at least a mistress is still someone who's in a relationship with
somebody. It may be insulting to call your wife your mistress, but it is
'wrong sense' rather than nonsense, which is what calling your mother or
father 'madre' or 'padre' would be.
>>>> Mamma quite naturally developed into pt mama ['m@m@]. Mãe [m@~j] can
>>>> hardly be confused with it. Nor brazilian mamãe [ma'm@~j] (would be
>>>> [m@'m@~j], br [@] is noticeably backer / more closed than pt). Pt mamã
>>>> [m@'m@~] still doesn't come very close; stress is quite important. (I
>>>> *think* the latter came from french.)
>>>
>>> I think the final /j/ could easily have been added as a diminutive or
>>> endearment, comparable to Spanish "mami", "papi".
>>
>> That's certainly possible; it would allow the development to be
>> apheresis of ma-/pa- rather than reduplication (at any rate *mã > mamã
>> > mamãe > mãe rather than parallel *mã > mãe > mamãe and *mã > mamã).
>> You do find 'mainha', a diminutive, in a lot of places.
>
> I did figure on apheresis, but only because I know "mamãe" courtesy of
> Carmen Miranda ("Mamãe, eu quero"). Come to think of it, that song IS
> about sucking at the teat, isn't it? (I wonder whether American movie
> goers in the 1940s had any idea that's what she was singing about.)
Yeah, I think they would find the lyrics strange to say the least.
She was actually portuguese, though she lived in Brazil since before
learning to speak (and her given name wasn't Carmen, that's spanish).
My great-grandmother was called Maria do Carmo. When my mother was born,
my grandmother asked (with a broken heart) my grandfather whether he
wanted to name her after his own mother, who had passed away some time
before. He did the right thing and told her he did like his mother very
much, but nor her name.
António Marques
> Harlan Messinger:
>
>> earlier suggestion, which I *realize* might mean that it was rejected,
>> papa > (pa)pai?
>>
>> And, by the way, French has a corresponding arrangement: maman (nasal
>> terminal vowel), papa (non-nasal terminal vowel).
>
> I thought I posted a message an hour or two ago where I ventured to
> guess that they are nursery words based on 'madre' and 'padre' and
> speculated that the /i/ was lowered to /e/ by the nasal.
Just as an aside: Pt <ãe> is the same as <ãi>, [@~j]. This is a common
diphthong in frequency but not environemt; it appears:
- in the word _cãibra_ 'cramp'
- in the word 'mãe'
- in the reflexes of latin -anes ('Segadães', 'cães')
In short, ãe is etymological and looks best word-finally.
Meanwhile, /e~/ has become [@~j] in Portugal in a lot of situations, but
it always written en/em:
- always in final position, e.g. origem = *oríjãe, Mem = mãe
- regionally before consoants (exactamente = izata mãite), more likely
in stressed position
Ruud Harmsen
<ED...@t-online.de>: in sci.lang:
>Both "artelho" and "artigo" derive from Lat. "articulus", for instance.
And so does "art�culo".
Thanks for that example, I didn't know about it, and added it to my
list in http://rudhar.com/etymolog/prantoen.htm .
António Marques
> Wed, 18 Nov 2009 12:20:33 +0100: "Ekkehard Dengler"
> <ED...@t-online.de>: in sci.lang:
>
>> Both "artelho" and "artigo" derive from Lat. "articulus", for instance.
>
>
> Thanks for that example, I didn't know about it, and added it to my
> list in http://rudhar.com/etymolog/prantoen.htm .
It's been mentioned before:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.lang/msg/87b5cb34c0018a03