|
THE ETYMOLOGY OF L. FEMINA AND L. FELLARE (c) Edward Aftung, 2008
PART 1: ETYMOLOGY OF L. FEMINA (i) introduction The orthodox etymology of L. femina woman connects the word with L. fellare to suck, specifically to perform fellatio. This somewhat offensive connexion is supposed to give L. femina the basic sense of "one who suckles". This article will attempt to demonstrate that the orthodox etymology is incorrect as to both words; and that on any view the semantic content of L. femina is not likely to be "suck" or "suckle". This argument is presented as follows (the sections are legible as separate links [not yet] or may be read as one in this document):- (ii) brief semantic critique(ii) brief semantic critique Even if the conventional etymology of L. fellare be accepted, the conventional etymology and semantics do not begin to attempt to explain the central semantic change from "suck" to "suckle" - and the latter sense is already represented in Latin by a different set of words. In fact, the orthodox etymology does not have the courage of its own convictions: by its logic, L. femina derives its semantic content from a word which means whether literally, by semantic specialization or by tabu-deformation, "to perform fellatio". This logic gives L. femina a distinctly pejorative meaning or at least offensive connotations. To overcome this result, we are supposed to accept not just the dubious semantic connexion but, in addition, an unexplained semantic shift from transitive to intransitive. Nor does it explain why a word like L. femina, which has wide semantic range encompassing female of any species > female human > woman, should have such a narrow or specific semantic basis. It is also notable that Latin provides a diminutive form in L. femella girl. It is argued that it is most unlikely that this was understood as "little suckler", even less likely as "little fellatrix"; it is much more likely to have been understood as "little woman". The existence of this diminutive indicates that the ancient speakers of Latin did not understand L. femina to have any connotation of sucking or suckling. (iii) normal Latin vocabulary for sucking or suckling The normal verb is L. sugere to suck (as in E. suction). The normal expressions for "to suckle" are L. nutricari (as in E. nourish) or L. mammam dare lit. "to give the breast" (as in E. mammal). The basic sense of "one who suckles" is already expressed in L. nutrix nurse; foster-mother. These words are totally unrelated to L. fellare or L. femina. (iv) L. femina is an isolate; normal IE.root *gwena; argument that L. femina is a neologism In the first place it should be noted that L. femina is an isolate - that is to say it is a specifically Latin word which is not related to the normal Indo-European ("IE") root gwena. The latter is an extremely respectable IE.etymon being well represented across the Centum-Satem Division eg OE. cwene; E. quean, queen; OHGer. quena; Goth qino woman, qéns queen; PGmc. *kwen; OPrus. genno, geno; Russ. OCSlav. жена = zhena wife, woman; Alb. zonje woman, wife, mistress, zana nymph, goddess; MGr. γυναίκα = gunaika woman; Gr. γυνή = gune (as in E. gynecology); Gr. gune = metathesis of PGr. *guen; Arm. kin; Pers. zan; TochB. sana; Skt. jani woman, gna goddessSo we can see that *gwena is everywhere in IE.languages - but it is not found in Latin where we have the isolate L. femina. Isolates have two explanations: either (1) they represent survivals of or borrowings from another (unknown) language; or (2) they are neologisms. This article will argue that L. femina may be clearly deconstructed and that at some point lost in antiquity an Italic linguist invented the word femina. Indeed the orthodox etymology implicitly makes the same argument. It was a very successful neologism, becoming the main Latin word for woman and, as with most important Latin words, exists in modern languages eg E. female, feminine; F. femelle (adj.n) female (not applied to humans), femme woman; wife, féminin feminine; Sp. hembra female; woman, femenil feminine; It. femmina non-human female, femminile feminine. The neologist was probably a linguist of some kind and must have had a specific idea in mind. But what was that idea? Are modern etymologists correct to connect the word with "suck" or "suckle"? (v) digression: L. mulier; argument that L. mulier was an ugly word and alternative required If a small digression be permitted, the other Latin word for woman is L. mulier (Sp. mujer woman; It. moglie wife, muliebre womanly) of mysterious origin. This word did not survive in French, being entirely replaced by words based on L. femina. It is argued that L. mulier had negative connotations by reason of its similarity to L. mula she-mule. It is even possible that the words are related (though it is normally identified with the same root as L. mollis soft). It is certainly credible that the word was considered unattractive in ancient times and the orthographic similarity to L. mula is evident (even if etymologically distinct). It is therefore arguable that L. femina was invented as an alternative for the ugly L. mulier, and indeed the subsequent history of the words indicates a distinct (though not conclusive) preference for the former. Even where L. mulier survives, there is an interesting dissimilation ie L. mula is unchanged in Sp. It. mula but Sp. mujer and It. moglie have changed to (deliberately?) obscure the similarity. This is an important point in trying to understand the neologist, who on this theory would have been aiming for a flattering, positive or at least neutral word to replace one distinctly unflattering. On this view, it is not likely that a word problematically similar to she-mule would have been replaced by one with a hardly more flattering reference to sucking. (vi) Latin root FE- and its meaning FE- is a well documented and productive root in Latin eg FECUNDUS adj. Fertile, fruitful, fecund.Of course, consistent with the argument of this article, L. femina is included in this group and L. fellare is excluded. It is evident that the essential common semantic content of all of these words is "produce". (vii) deconstruction of L. femina; analysis of -min-; consideration of L. femur, femen Given the presence of the FE- root, L. femina must be constructed FE-MIN-A and orthodox etymology agrees. In general, notwithstanding that non-controversial division, orthodox etymology treats -MIN- as without semantic content ie as an arbitrary or unexplained suffix. Yet *mi- is a common IE.element, invariably with the sense of small, and is well represented in Latin in the nasalized form min- eg L. deminuere, minuere to make smaller, diminish; L. minor lesser; L. minus less; L. minister underling, servant lit. small or lesser person. The final -A is simply the normal Latin marker of femininity. Therefore FE-MIN-A may be semantically deconstructed as:- produce-small-feminine marker or, more intelligibly, female producer of small things. From this the senses of female > human female > woman are easily derived without any reference to sucking or suckling. In this regard it is important to note that L. femina (n) means both female and woman; It. femmina (n) means only non-human female; Fr. femelle (adj, n) female (but not applied to humans). So the etymology and ancient and modern usages support the posited semantic chain of female producer of small things > female > human female > womanIt should also be noted that, on the view that -MIN- has semantic content as small, it makes even less sense for the first element FE- to mean suckle because, almost by definition, females suckle their young only. A combination of elements meaning suckle-small would be tautologous, or at least pleonastic, and therefore improbable in what appears to be a carefully constructed neologism. (It may be argued that all neonates are necessarily small, at least relative to the mothers, and so the sense of produce-small is equally pleonastic, but this reasoning would be false: a suckling is necessarily small, at least relative to its mother, but a producer may produce anything, large or small.) A brief mention may be made of L. femur thigh. This has a rare variant, probably older than L. femur, in L. femen (gen. femin-is). The variant is remarkably similar to L. femina (which is, by a coincidence of Latin grammer, also the neuter plural of L. femen). Indeed the dissimilation L. femen > L. femur may well have occurred because of this (accidental?) similarity. L. femur has not been included in the Latin FE- group because its etymology is obscure. In "An Etymological Dictionary of Latin", Valpy posits a form L. *ferimen from L. fer- carry, with sense of "part which carries the body". Yet more obscurely, Starostin proposes an IE. root *bhedh- represented only in L. femur, femen and Slavic. bedro (eg Russ. бедро = bedro). In Latin this would indicate (improbable) archaic forms like *fed-men or *fed-mur. The Starostin etymology is not generally accepted. The argument of Valpy for L. *ferimen is reasonable, though merely an educated guess; a different educated guess is that L. femur, femen is in the first group of words from under IE. dhe- set out at part (x) below. It has some similarity to Gr. θέμεθλα = them-ethla foundation, base. It may be worth noting that the femur is the biggest bone in the human skeleton and may merit such a grand etymology. If that inclusion of L. femur, femen be correct, it would be related to L. femina, but tangentially, and in a word of semantic isolation relative to the other Latin vocabulary. It is a notable curiosity that, as the form L. femur became dominant, L. femen continued to exist as a relatively rare word with the specialized sense of "inner or upper thigh". Not surprisingly, the word was often used in a sexual context, particularly in relation to the female body. This may however have created more confusion than clarity eg it has been suggested that L. femen and femina are closely connected, both in etymology and semantics. This article argues that L. femur, femen and L. femina may be indirectly connected as instances of IE. dhe- (though with quite specific and different meanings). In any event, the etymology and semantic origin of L. femur (whatever they may be) do not support the idea that L. FE- has any significant content in Latin "suck" or "suckle". [As interesting obscurities, two rare words directly from L. femen are L. feminalia leggings for the thighs and the adjective L. interfemineus between the thighs.] (viii) Latin root FE- and its cognates; identity with IE. dhe- This is not the place to attack conventional IE.theory in its entirety - or it may be the place, but there is not time to do so. Attention will therefore be directed at three supposedly distinct IE.roots dhe-, dhei- and dheigh-. In the first place it is argued that it is most unlikely that these roots are distinct, in other words it is argued that they represent a single root: dhe-; and dhei- and dheigh- are merely suffixed forms ie variants of the same root. How probable is it that a primitive language, Proto-Indo-European ("PIE"), with barely a hundred roots (or morphemes), would have had three such similar yet supposedly distinct roots? This article argues that there is no fundamental difference between the three roots ie there is a common semantic content which defines all of them. But what is that common content, and how does it inform the analysis of L. femina? The argument already presented is that the Latin vocabulary has the primary or dominant sense of to produce. It is not possible to look at the Latin words set out above without forming the idea that the essence of FE- is to produce as opposed to something else eg suck or suckle. The dominant semantic quality in Latin is clear and it simply a matter of probability that the same semantic quality is at the root of L. femina. In other words, whatever the cognates of L. FE- may mean, it is clear what it means in Latin. Yet that semantic quality of to produce is in no way undermined, and is indeed reinforced to a massive extent, by the lexicon associated to dhe-, dhei-, or dheigh-. (ix) analysis of IE. dhe- It is argued that the three given roots dhe-, dhei-, and dheigh- are in fact properly understood as one root dhe- and variants thereof. Analysis of the three in combination reveals the semantic chain:- to set, place, put > to do > to make, produce with subset to form, shape, mould> to be productive, be fertile > to be nourishinng, to nourish > subject forms with basic sense of anything which makes or produces something > object forms with basic sense of anything made or produced(x) first or primary meaning of IE. dhe-: "to set, place, put" E. doom primary sense of "judgement"; Dan. Swed. dom; OE. OSax. OFris. dôm; Goth. doms judgement; L. Themis Themis, goddess of justice = Gr. θέμις = themis law; L. femur (with tantalizing variant L. femen, femin-) thigh (perh. with idea of "founding part of body"); Gr. θέμεθλα = them-ethla foundation, base; Skt. dhaman numerous meanings including "law", "condition", "state", "dwelling" all from basic sense of "something which has been put (down)"; Ger. tun to put, also means "to do"; Lith. deti put; Czech. diti; L. -dere in L. abdere to put away, hide, conceal (as in L. abdomen); possibly* the same root (but duplicated) in L. dare (dedi, datum) mainly "to give" but also had meaning of "to put"; Gr. τιθέναι = ti-the-nai το set, place, put; L. thema proposition, subject, theme; Gr. θέσις = thesis act of putting, proposition, thesis; Gr. θήκη = theke where something is put ie. case, container, repository (as in E. theco-); Hitt. dai- put; Avest. dadaiti he puts; Skt. dha put, dadhati puts, places, dhatra vessel, receptacle(xi) digression: IE.root da- or dada- to give It is briefly argued that, in addition to the fully argued conflation of IE.roots dhe-, dhei- and dheigh-, the IE.root da- give [given as do- in the American Heritage list] is a specialized variant of the same basic uber-root dhe-. The phonetic specializations are: (1) duplication (normally but tautologously called "reduplication" by linguists) of the root eg Russ. давать = davat', дать = dat' imperfective and perfective forms of "give"; Russ. дача = dacha "gift" > dacha = PSlav. *datja; Lith. duoti to give; L. dedi I gave, datum given (as in E. date); L. dot- gift > dowry; Gr. διδόναι = didonai I give; OPers. dadatuv let him give; Skt. dadati gives; (2) the characteristic vowel a which sometimes becomes o in the Mediterranean coloration eg L. do I give; Gr. δωρον = doron gift; Gr. δωσις = dosis act of giving > dose; (3) the initial d never softens to dh and it is particularly important to note that this rule applies to both elements in the duplication da-da-. The semantic specialization is evident - a shift from put or produce to give. It is also notable that the semantic shift serves to distinguish ideas which may well be synonymous in some circumstances eg "produce" can mean "give" and vice versa, thus creating a linguistic demand for distinction where necessary. Given the IE. phenomenon of duplication to create the perfect tense of verbs, it is quite possible that *dada- first emerged as the perfect tense of a verb based on dhe-, in which case the new verb dada- would have been a preterite-present. On this analysis the IE.roots are:- DHE- put; make; produce with specialized variant DA- or (perhaps more strictly, as duplicated or preterite-present) DADA- give (the latter form being precisely represented in OPers. and Skt)(xii) second meaning of IE. dhe-: "to do" E. do, deed act of doing, what is done; Goth. gadeths a doing, deed; Dut. doen; Ger. tun; OE. dôn; OFris. dua; MHGer. OHGer. tuon all meaning "to do"; Russ. делать = delat' do; L. facere to do or make (F. faire; Sp. hacer; It. fare)(xiii) third meaning of IE. dhe-: "to make, produce" L. facere to do or make (F. faire; Sp. hacer; It. fare); OPers. ada he made; Skt. dha to make, create, dhataramh creator(xiv) subset of "to make, produce": "to form, shape, mould"; argument from metathesis of dhe- to deh- E. dough; OE. dâh dough; OE. -dige maker of dough extracted from OE. hlæfdige "loaf-kneader", mistress of a household, lady; OHGer. teig dough; Goth. daigs dough, deigan to smear; to make dough; E. dig, dike; Ger. deich; OE. dîc; Dut. dijk; ON. diki all meaning "mound, dike, dam" etc; E. ditch; Ger. teich pond; MHGer. tîch pond; Dan. dige; Swed. dike; Icel. dik, diki all meaning "ditch, trench"; Dut. dicht poetry; Ger. gedicht poem; OE. diht a setting in order, disposition; MHGer. tihte composition, fiction, poem; Icel. dikta to compose; to feign; Swed. dikta to feign; Dan. digte to make poems; Dut. Ger. dichten to compose; OE. dihtan to set in order, arrange, compose; MHGer. tihten to form, shape, mould; PGmc. *diht- form, shape, mould; OIr. digen "compacted" ie. firm, solid; E. feign; L. fingere to form, shape, mould = nasalized stem fig- (as in E. figment and figure), supine fictus = *figtos (as in E. fiction); Gr. τείχος = teikhos wall; Avest. diz to mould, daeza- wall, pairadaeza "around-walled" ie. walled garden, paradise; Skt. dih- to smear or plaster, dehah something which is formed, body, dehi mound, bank, rampart, wall(xv) fourth meaning of IE. dhe-: "to be productive, be fertile" L. fecundus fruitful, fertile, fecund; L. felix fruitful; auspicious, favorable; fortunate, lucky (as in E. felicity); L. fetus (adj) pregnant; productive; Gr. θηλειν = thelein to flourish, abound; to cause to bloom(xvi) fifth meaning of IE. dhe-: "to be nourishing, to nourish" OPruss. dadan milk (n); Goth. daddjan to suckle; Gr. τιθηνειν = tithenein to take care of, cherish, foster; Gr. τιθήνη = tithene nurse (n), τιθηνός = foster-father, both with basic sense of "carer"; Gr. θήλυς = thelus, fruitful, prolific; nourishing; female; Gr. θηλή = thele teat, nipple lit. "nourishing thing"?; Skt. dhayah nourishing, dhatri nurse, midwife, mother(xvii) sixth meaning of IE. dhe-: subject forms with basic sense of "anything which makes or produces something" L. femina female; woman; Skt. dhenu milch cow(xviii) seventh meaning of IE. dhe-: object forms with basic sense of "anything made or produced" L. facies form, shape; face; L. fenum hay lit. "what is produced"; L. figura form, shape; nature, kind; figure (from specific root *deh- given above); L. *felia, *felios = L. filia daughter, filius son (as in E. filial); L. fetus (n) brood, young; an augmented form L. *feton- is posited as the origin of Fr. faon originally, young animal of any kind; in modern Fr. young deer, fawn; perh. Ger. tannen fir(tree); MHGer. tanne fir; OHGer. tanna fir or oak; Skt. dhanu- tree, type of tree lit. "product (of the earth)" (Pokorny); Skt. dhanya grain (all pointing to suffixed form IE. *dhen- which may be direct precursor of L. fenum; all with specialized sense "product of the earth")(ixx) table of IE. dhe- and derivates The preceding evidence and analyis reveals the following etymologic, phonematic and semantic relations:- |
| BASIC ROOT IE. DHE-
to put, do, make, produce, nourish |
||||
| IE. DHEM
what is laid down: foundation, law |
IE. DHEN
product of the earth: senses of tree, grain etc |
Medit. DHEL
local variant meaning: fertile, nourish, offspring |
IE. DEH
metathesis of DHE: make/manipulate material |
IE. DADA "give"
special duplication or preterite-present |
|
(This table is not intended to be exhaustive: IE. dhe- may well be the basis of other IE. roots normally given as separate or distinct, but more properly understood as specialized variants thereof.) (xx) etymology of L. femina: conclusion From the above it is evident that L. FE- is a representation of the IE. root dhe-. That much is not controversial and orthodox etymology agrees. The issue is what L. FE- means, in particular in the word L. femina. The evidence is that IE. dhe- provides the following semantic content:- to set, place, put > to do > to make, produce with subset to form, shape, mould> to be productive, be fertile > to be nourishing, to nourish > subject forms with basic sense of anything which makes or produces something > object forms with basic sense of anything made or producedThe evidence of the Latin words fecundus, *felios / filius, felix, femina, fenus, fenum, fetus places the Latin FE- in the following extract of the chain:- to make, produce > to be productive, be fertileThis is a relatively narrow and specific semantic range. From the extensive etymology already given, we can see the IE. dhe- is very well represented in Latin in other forms or variants eg L. facere to do or make, L. fingere to form, shape, mould and the arguably related duplication of IE. dhe- > IE. dada- eg L. dare, dedi, datum to give, gave, given. It therefore makes sense for a specific form FE- to have a more or less specific meaning. If one takes all the etymology as a whole, the sense of "suck" makes few appearance eg the Gr. verb thelaxo. Even there, the primary sense of the word is "suckle", as opposed to "suck". It is also clear that the verb is simply an augmented form of Gr. thele nipple, which therefore provides the semantic foundation of Gr. thelaxo ie "give nipple". If Gr. thele had a literal translation, or credible origin, as something to do with sucking or suckling, that would advance the case for "suck" as being a valid semantic element in the chain of meanings given above. It is however quite clear from the related Greek vocabulary that the element thel- means "to be productive; to be fertile; to nourish". It is also possible that the Gr. thel- represents a Mediterranean variant of IE. dhe-, namely *dhel- represented in L. felix fruitful; L. *felia, *felios offspring. But on any view the dominant semantic value is nothing to do with sucking. The semantic representation of "suck" under IE. dhe- is therefore, at best, extremely incidental and peripheral. That semantic value for IE. dhe- is wholly unattested in Latin, notwithstanding a mass of Latin vocabulary from the same IE. root, save in the controversial L. fellare. It is therefore much more probable that L. femina has a basic semantic quality from one of the other meanings, most probably simply "to produce" which is the normal meaning of L. FE-. The entire controversy arises because orthodox etymology places L. fellare under IE. dhe-, supposedly from an intermediate form *felare. That intermediate form is of a course a necessary construction, because the -LL- of the classic form is otherwise wholly unexplained. This article will now deal with L. fellare in detail. PART 2: MEANING AND ETYMOLOGY OF L. FELLARE (xxi) argument that L. fellare not synonymous with L. sugere One fundamental point, and the subject of many errors, is that while L. fellare does mean "to suck", it is an anteclassic and rare verb. As stated the normal Latin verb for "to suck" is L. sugere. In Latin, L. sugere and L. fellare are not synonymous ie they are not interchangeable. In classic Latin, L. fellare was considered an impolite or tabu word (eg as used by Martial and Catullus with the specific sense of "perform fellatio") and by no means a normal or everyday part of vocabulary. This is because L. fellare had (at least from the first century BC and ever since) a distinctly sexual meaning or connotation. Further, the well known linguistic phenomenon of tabu-deformation may have occurred here, in which case the word could mean something entirely different from "suck". (xxii) posited form L. *felare; possible derivation from Gr. thelaxo to suckle Orthodox etymology recognises the orthographic difficulties posed by the -LL- in L. fellare, which is why it posits the (non-extant) form L. *felare. If that form be historic, as set out above it may indicate a direct borrowing from Gr. thelaxo to suckle. In that case it would indeed have a definite though extremely tangential connexion with L. femina; but that connexion is argued to be too remote for the Latin words to share semantic content in "suckle". It is in any event argued that the posited form L. *felare does not assist the interpretation of L. fellare; it is further argued that the -LL- is historic and indeed leads the way to more probable etymologies. (xxiii) alternative etymology to give connexion with IE. bhel- swollen L. fellare may be related to L. phallus; Gr. φαλλός = phallos. This is another word routinely misunderstood, in this case as "penis", when the Latin and Greek words had the highly specific sense of "swollen ie erect penis". It is not suggested that the relation is direct, rather that all the words are instance of IE. bhel-. (xxiv) IE. bhel- and cognates; examination of instances in Latin and Greek L. phallus and Gr. phallos are instances of IE. bhel-2 which means variously "swell or be swollen; be inflated". This root has important variants given in the American Heritage list as IE. bhelgh and IE. bhel-3, though all essentially the same root. Wherever the bhel-2 class is found in Latin or Greek, the -L- is almost always duplicated as -LL-, which is also a normal feature of instances of this class in other languages (eg E. ball). As far as L. fellare is concerned, the most important comparanda are other Latin and Greek words from this class eg:- L. fel, fell- gall-bladder; LL. fellosus full of gall; L. folliculum small bag; L. follis bellows; punch-ball; L. fullo one who thickens cloth, fuller; L. fellare primary sense of "do something to/with a swollen thing", "to suck", "to perform fellatio"; L. phallus = Gr. φαλλός = phallos swollen penis; Gr. φάλλαινα = phallaina whale lit. "swollen thing"; Gr. φελλός = phellos corktree; bark thereof; a cork, perh. from basic sense of "tending to swell" if not simply from related sense of "bloom"; Gr. φύλλον = phullon leaf; also flower (as in name Phyllis)So it is evident that this root with -LL- is well represented in Latin and Greek (even if the controversial inclusion of L. fellare be ignored and Gr. phellos and phullon are treated as instances of IE. bhel-3 rather than IE. bhel-2). (xxv) argument for L. etymon FELL- meaning "swollen thing"; possible semantic origin and development of L. fellare Further, the etymon L. FELL- is precisely represented in L. fel, fell- which has the primary sense of gall-bladder ie. "swollen or inflated thing" and, it is argued, in L. fell-are. On this view the basic content of L. fellare would be "do something to/with a swollen thing" with subsequent semantic specialization. The following semantic chain is posited:- swollen thing > attach oneself to a swollen thing > attach oneself to a breast or other (swollen) part of bodyThis simple and credible semantic chain is a complete explanation for L. fellare to mean "to suck" and its later specialization, while at the same time coming from a root not connected with L. FE- or IE. dhe- (and therefore distinct from L. femina). The posited chain is incidentally very similar to the semantic development of Gr. thelaxo from Gr. thele, save that is from a different root from a basic sense of "nourish" rather than "swollen". It also solves the serious phonematic difficulty of the -LL- form (on this analysis the posited L. *felare is superfluous, indeed incorrect.) (xxvi) CONCLUSION It is argued in final summary that:- 1. L. femina is a clear instance of L. FE- with basic sense of "produce" or "produce young" (where -MIN- has semantic value).February/March 2008 (c) Edward Aftung home |