Page:The New International Encyclopædia 1st ed. v. 07.djvu/291

* ETYMOLOGY. 259 ETYMOLOGY. tli is reality. It is, however, noteworthy that long before the foundation of the Stoic School, Plato (q.v.) made an approximation to the modern method in his Cratylus. Not only doea he there set forth for the first time the elemental divisions of Greek phonology, but he intentionally etymologizes. Thus, he correctly connects 7UK1), woman, with yuvri, seed, and going a step fur- ther he declares that the words for tire (trip), water (iiSup), and dog (kOuiv) are almost the same in Greek as in Phrygian, which we now know to be related to the Armenian (cf. Armenian hur, fire, get, water. Sun, dog). Independently of Greece, India developed a stud.v of language far more exact and thorough than any other ancient people ever did. As in Greece etymology had sprung from philosophy, in India it had its basis in religion. The first formal treatise on etymolo- gy in Sanskrit is Yaska's Nirukta ( literally, out- spoken ), which dates perhaps from as far back as the fifth century B.C. The Nirkuta, which ranks as one of the six Vedangas, or members of the Veda, was composed to explain hard words in the Rigveda. The stress laid upon the source and meaning of the words, both in India and in Greece, is highly significant of the practical value of ety- mology. It is safe to affirm that without ety- mology there can be no exact orthoepy. Exact- ness in the use of words is in direct proportion to the exactness of knowledge of their meaning, and exactness of knowledge of their meaning is in its turn in large measure conditioned by exactness of knowledge of their origin. Again, the attempt to etymologize is found in the earliest literary rec- ords. The Indian Yajur Veda (q.v.) abounds in these primitive etymologies, many of which are extremely naive and erroneous (as the story that the deity Prajapati swelled up, asvayat, and from this swelling, scayatha, came the horse, a&va), while others are still deemed correct (as when by. day, diva, Prajapati created the gods, ileitis, "for that is their godhead," devatvam) . In the Bible Eve (Heb. Bawwa, Gen. iii. 20) is popularly derived from hawa, to be, and in Gen. ii. 23. ishsha, woman, is explained as a derivative of Ish, man. This primitive kind of etymology is still common, and is known as popular, or better as folk-etymology. It is sometimes right, and as frequently wrong. Often among those who are unacquainted with the history of words, there will be found attempts to etymologize them as being related to others to which they may have some phonetic or, less commonly, some graphic resemblance. Examples of this are exceedingly numerous. Thus, German Wahwioitz, frenzy, is popularly associated with wahnen, to think, es- pecially to think incorrectly, wdiereas it really signifies, as the Old High German form wana- n-i-.zi shows, witlessness, the first component be- ing wana, without. Another instance is German Siindflut, deluge, connected popularly with siin- den, to sin, but which is really derived from sin- vluot, great flood. In English we have words like bridegroom (shortened also into groom), really bride's man (Anglo-Saxon brydguma), associated with groom; island, properly isle-land (Anglo- Saxon Bg-lond), which has been explained as land like an eye in the waters; crayfish (French ecri- visse, crab), which is supposed to be a sort of fish. ,u- asparagus (Gk. atnr&payos), which becomes sparrow-grass in rustic speech. Abortive as many of the popular etymologies are, they are none the less important as indicating the universal need, felt by such as employ language, foi omi of explanation of the meaning of the words they use. With the discovery of the importance oi Sanskrit (q.v.) in linguistic investigation, and the rinc oi 1 lie science of comparative linguistics (see Phixolooy), etymologj > placed on ;> sci- entific; foundation. Its history is connected in- separably i 1 1 1 the branch of learning of which it foinis :i part, but its method may be briefly outlined. First and foremost tier, must be a strict adhere me in all etymological investigation to the principles of phonetic law (q.v.). The etymology which fails to conform to these laws must receive overwhelming confirmation from other quarters before it can be regarded as even possible. In the case of loan word- phonetic law in apparently violated, and it, will frequently happen that a language will have two or more words derived from a single word, One being the regular phonetic development and the other a bor- rowed form. In this ease the latter form, known by the French term mot savant, is usually dif- ferentiated in meaning from the former. Thus we have in French and English such words as royal and regal, both from the Latin regalis, kingly; the form regal being borrowed directly from the Latin, while royal (ef. French roi, king, from the Latin accusative regem) is the phonetically cor- rect form. Loan words may also undergo the regular sound-changes of the language into which they have been adopted. Thus, Latin pondus, pound, appears in Gothic and Anglo-Saxon as pund, with unchanged consonants, but in Old High German it is subject to the action of Grimm's law (q.v.) and becomes phunt. It is therefore evident that in etymology attention must be paid to the history of words, and some- times to the records of the tribes speaking them. Thus, the English wise is akin to the Gothic un- weis, unwise, Old High German wis, New High German weise ; but wise is also a doublet of guise, which is the form assumed by ivis in the Romance languages, which borrowed the word from their Germanic invaders. If it is true that the same word may assume different forms in the same language, it is equally true that different words may become identical in form in a given language. The large class of homonyms in every language is sufficient proof of this. An excellent English example of this phenomenon is sound, which is a conglomerate of four originally dis- tinct words — namely, Anglo - Saxon geswnd, hearty, Anglo-Saxon sund, a body of water. Latin sonus, noise, and Latin subundare, to dive be- neath the waves. It is probable that many in- stances in which a word shows extraordinary di- versity of meanings are to be traced to this pro- cess of conglomeration rather than to semasiologi- cal developments. (See Semasiology.) It is, however, in the tracing of words back through an entire group of cognate languages to a hypo- thetical original form, denoted conventionally by an asterisk (*), that etymology finds its prin- cipal application. The older etymologists made wild guesses in their primitive investigations, and such etymologies are still made by untrained minds. Thus. Latin deus, god. old Latin deivos, akin to Sanskrit deva, god. has been connected with English devil, from Greek (M/3oXos, slanderer, and English god, in addition to the old stock comparison with i7oo<i, with which the