Modern dictionaries usually say that an English word is derived from a Latin one and they stop there. They do not examine or analyze the etymon of the Latin word.
That is the reason why I delve into older dictionaries like the following two (Both of them are freely available by google-books):
1. English Etymology; or, a derivative Dictionary of the English Language. By George William Lemon (London, M.DCC.LXXXIII).
2. Etymological Dictionary of the Latin Language by F.E.J. Valpy (London, 1828).
tico wrote:Well, where's Portuguese, Catalan, Galician etc.? A bit incomplete, I think.
indigenous Look up indigenous at Dictionary.com
1646, from L.L. indigenus "born in a country, native," from L. indigena "a native," lit. "in-born person," from Old L. indu "in, within" (earlier endo) + gen-, root of gignere (perf. genui) "beget," from PIE *gen- "produce."
ThomasGR wrote: I do not understand this "earlier endo", and after all these attempts to credit Latin more than it's worth, it jumps suddenly to PIE.
ThomasGR wrote:Sometimes, I have the same impression as Neos.indigenous Look up indigenous at Dictionary.com
1646, from L.L. indigenus "born in a country, native," from L. indigena "a native," lit. "in-born person," from Old L. indu "in, within" (earlier endo) + gen-, root of gignere (perf. genui) "beget," from PIE *gen- "produce."
for me indigenous comes clearly from Greek endogenes. In this etymology, there is only "in" and "indu" mentioned. Greeks used this compound word earlier than Latins, so, I think, Greeks should get all the fame. I do not understand this "earlier endo", and after all these attempts to credit Latin more than it's worth, it jumps suddenly to PIE.
ThomasGR wrote:Because when the first English wrote endo,
they might have known the Greek endogenes and where somewhat lazy to look up grammar rules and form indigenus.
ThomasGR wrote:Because when the first English wrote endo, they might have known the Greek endogenes and where somewhat lazy to look up grammar rules and form indigenus.
annis wrote:ThomasGR wrote:Because when the first English wrote endo, they might have known the Greek endogenes and where somewhat lazy to look up grammar rules and form indigenus.
[choking sound here] You're just pulling fantasies out of the air!
The OED has 1646 as the first attested use of the word in English. Do you suppose the first person to use it in English had such poor command of Latin he couldn't remember a word used in both classical and medieval Latin and instead pulled out a mangled pronunciation of a Greek word that has a total of three citations in LSJ?
That anyone at all has to explain that Latin isn't a child of Greek but a cousin
I recall seeing a language family tree once and seem to recall that Greek was much more closely related to Russian than this tree seems to indicate.Lucus Eques wrote:I love that IE family tree! I'm going to print that out and put it on my wall.
annis wrote: That anyone at all has to explain that Latin isn't a child of Greek but a cousin — a distant one at that — leaves me with the same urge to dig out my brains with a dull spoon. It'd stop the burning sensation.
Bert wrote:The way I recall, Greek and Russian were lone sisters. This family tree I found in a (borrowed) book put out by a languages museum.
The shape of the letters sure have similarities.annis wrote:Bert wrote:The way I recall, Greek and Russian were lone sisters. This family tree I found in a (borrowed) book put out by a languages museum.
Interesting. I've never heard of them being thought particularly close, but it wouldn't surprise me if they were once thought so.
Bert wrote:The shape of the letters sure have similarities.
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], hmederos22 and 74 guests