Live data from Hacker News

Words that seem related but aren't (2015)

theweek.com

11–20 of 83 posts

Re: Words that seem related but aren't (2015)

#11
post #8

> Where male goes back to Latin masculus, female comes through French femelle from Latin femella. The eventual overlap in pronunciation was accidental. Latin was masculus and femella, old French was masle/male and femelle/femaile, modern "English" is male and female. We didn't take one from Latin and one from French -- we took both from French. It doesn't make any sense that "male" was taken from "masculus" when "mas…

That's the hard science of etymology for you.

Re: Words that seem related but aren't (2015)

#12
I posted a comment noting that some words can no longer be used because they resemble offensive words, even though they are etymologically unrelated.

I am ironically amused to note that the comment appears to have offended somebody or something sufficiently to make it disappear, even though it did not contain any actual offensive words.

Re: Words that seem related but aren't (2015)

#13
post #4

I love this kind of thing. There’s plenty of neat little nuggets I have come across. Folk Etymology: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Folk_etymology This has a good list of words that came from misconceptions about etymology. - “Crayfish”/“crawfish” mistakenly associated with “fish,” from Old French “crevice,” diminutive of their word for crab. - A really great one: “chaise lounge” from the French “chaise longue” meanin…

> The English word outrage is a loanword from French, where it was formed by combining the adverb outre (meaning "beyond") with the suffix -age; thus, the original literal meaning is "beyondness" – that is, beyond what is acceptable. The rebracketing as a compound of out- with the noun or verb rage has led to both a different pronunciation than the one to be expected for such a loanword (compare umbrage) and an additional meaning of "angry reaction" not present in French.

Brilliant. I'll need to make a point of pronouncing "outrage" to rhyme with "garage" from now on. "It is an oot-RAAZH!"

Re: Words that seem related but aren't (2015)

#15

I posted a comment noting that some words can no longer be used because they resemble offensive words, even though they are etymologically unrelated. I am ironically amused to note that the comment appears to have offended somebody or something sufficiently to make it disappear, even though it did not contain any actual offensive words.

College Humor did a bit on this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aQTJl2bwoZQ

Re: Words that seem related but aren't (2015)

#16

I posted a comment noting that some words can no longer be used because they resemble offensive words, even though they are etymologically unrelated. I am ironically amused to note that the comment appears to have offended somebody or something sufficiently to make it disappear, even though it did not contain any actual offensive words.

The comment is still available [0], just "dead", so it doesn't show up on unless the user has enabled "show dead comments" on their profile page.

[0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30584622

Re: Words that seem related but aren't (2015)

#18
post #3

I love the origins of English words. A book on the history of a ton of words would make for ana interesting read.

I enjoyed The Etymologicon by Mark Forsyth.

Also, if you are a member of a public library, you can often get free access to the full Oxford English Dictionary online, which has detailed etymologies.

Re: Words that seem related but aren't (2015)

#19

My personal discovery: “testament” and “statement”. They are anagrams, and obviously have some semantic connection - “this is what I’d like to happen” vs. “this is my opinion on a topic”. But no shared root (known to me) or other relation.

> They are anagrams

Being an anagram has no value: not only switching the order of sounds is not a mechanism in the evolution of terms (at least, I cannot think of a single example), but more relevantly the sounds do not overlap with their symbols - terms are in general transliterations (so the "character" has little importance, being a mostly referencing simplification).

Re: Words that seem related but aren't (2015)

#20

I posted a comment noting that some words can no longer be used because they resemble offensive words, even though they are etymologically unrelated. I am ironically amused to note that the comment appears to have offended somebody or something sufficiently to make it disappear, even though it did not contain any actual offensive words.

Sadly I think those words have died, as victims of semantic pollution, through no fault of their own. Even though no dictionary will attest to an offensive meaning, they share enough phonemic material with malwords to trigger an immune response, which is not something you generally want to do to your readers.
Post reply on HN