In a message dated 4/4/10 3:15:37 PM, [email protected] writes:
> > I grant that the patterns and tones of > English are different from those of other languages, but I don't grant > Michael's > unsupported assertion that they are "inherently meaningful".< > > Then why they (patterns) were created in the first place? > Boris Shoshensky > That's often an intriguing and unanswered question. We can see why certain onomatopeic words came into a language. and why various portmanteau and compound words arose. Frustratingly, most etymologies can't get to "the first place". They simply cite a parental word in an earlier language. When a dictionary remarks about a word "Origin unknown", they are only confessing they can't cite a word's immediate predecessor in an older language. Look up 'tiger' some time. You'll be told this "genealogy": [Middle English 'tigre', from Old English 'tigras', and from Old French 'tigre', both from Latin 'tigris', from Greek, of Iranian origin.]
