Hello Thomas! On Friday, November 22, 2002 at 6:19:31 AM you wrote:
> The author's assessment that "res" is a Latin expression meaning "in > the matter of" is wrong, "res" is just a female noun meaning "thing" > or "matter". Whether "Re:" stands for "res" (in which case I wonder > why we exchange the last "s" with a colon) or for "Reply:" is > anybody's guess. I would say the latter, in the sense of: "I am > replying to your mail with a subject of: [followed be the original > subject]". Yes, "res" means literally "a thing". From your clear statement in this paragraph I am sure you are a Latin scholar with deep historic knowledge, so forgive my following correction. "Res" also stands for "being" or "phenomenon"; the term "republic" stems from the Latin expression "res publica" meaning literally "something concerning all people" (although those people actually were citizens, therefore not at all "all" people). For a very long time Latin has been the language of the literate people - they spoke it deep into the Middle Ages, sometimes even up to modern times, and they wrote in it. In *lettres* they used the used the ablative "re" to show right at the beginning what the following pamphlet was about. Thus it came into use in the sense of "concerning, regarding". It is pure coincidence that the prefix "re-" in the English word "reply" (borrowed from Latin) is spelled the same. Actually the term used by RITLabs "Subject" is a tell-tale sign for the original meaning of "re:" being a translation of "res". Even a most basic Latin dictionary like *Langenscheidts Taschenw�rterbuch Lateinisch* gives a lot of meanings for "res" including the original "Schatz, Besitz" (treasure, property, possession). Thank you for your time. -- Dierk Haasis The Bat 1.62/Beta6 on Windows XP 5.1 2600Service Pack 1 When you lose, don't lose the lesson. ________________________________________________ Current version is 1.61 | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
