The Romance of Words Part 17

[86] Or perhaps _*alboculare_, as _albus oculus_, lit. white eye, is used of blindness in an early Vulgar Latin glossary.

[87] Of uncertain origin. Lat. _putare_, to cut (cf. _amputate_), or Gk.

?f?t??, implanted?

[88] From _oculus_, eye, in the sense of bud.

CHAPTER IX

FOLK-ETYMOLOGY

The sound, spelling, and even the meaning of a word are often perverted by influences to which the collective name of folk-etymology has been given. I here use the term to include all phenomena which are due to any kind of misunderstanding of a word. A word beginning with _n_ sometimes loses this sound through its being confused with the _n_ of the indefinite article _an_. Thus _an adder_ and _an auger_ are for _a nadder_ (_cf._ Ger. _Natter_) and _a nauger_, Mid. Eng. _navegor_, properly an instrument for piercing the _nave_ of a wheel. _Ap.r.o.n_ was in Mid. English _naprun_, from Old Fr. _naperon_, a derivative of _nappe_, cloth. The _aitch-bone_ was formerly the _nache-bone_, from Old Fr. _nache_, b.u.t.tock, Vulgar Lat. _*natica_ for _nates_. _Nache_ is still used by French butchers. _Humble-pie_ is a popular perversion of _umble-pie_, _i.e._, a pie made from the _umbles_, or inferior parts of the stag. But _umble_ is for earlier _numble_, Old Fr. _nomble_, formed, with dissimilation, from Lat. _lumbulus_, diminutive of _lumbus_, loin; cf. _niveau_ (p. 58). Thus _humble-pie_ has etymologically no connection with humility. _Umpire_ represents Old Fr. _non per_ (_pair_), not equal, the _umpire_ being a third person called in when arbitrators could not agree. This appears clearly in the following extract from a medieval letter--

"And if so be that the said arbitrators may not accord before the said feast of Allhalowes, then the said parties be the advise abovesaid are agreed to abide the award and ordinance of an _noumper_ to be chosen be the said arbitrators."

(_Plumpton Correspondence_, 1431.)

For the sense we may compare Span. _tercero_, "the third, a broaker, a mediator" (Percyvall). _An eyas_ falcon is for _a neyas_ falcon, Fr.

_niais_, foolish, lit. nestling, related to _nid_, nest. Rosenkrantz uses it in the literal sense--

"But there is, sir, an aiery of children, little _eyases_, that cry out on the top of question, and are most tyranically clapped for't."

(_Hamlet_, ii. 2.)

Somewhat similar is the loss in French of initial _a_ in _la boutique_ for _l'aboutique_, Greco-Lat. _apotheca_, and _la Pouille_ for _l'Apouille_, Apulia, or of the initial _l_ in _ounce_, a kind of tiger-cat, from Fr. _once_, earlier _lonce_, "the _ounce_, a ravenous beast" (Cotgrave), taken as _l'once_. It is almost a doublet of _lynx_.

The opposite has happened in the case of _a newt_ for _an ewt_ and _a nick-name_ for _an eke-name_. _Eke_, also, occurs in the first stanza of John Gilpin. It is cognate with Ger. _auch_, also, and Lat. _augere_, to increase. _Nuncle_, the customary address of a court fool to his superiors--

"How now, _nuncle_! Would I had two c.o.xcombs and two daughters."

(_Lear_, i. 4.)

is for _mine uncle_. We also find _naunt_. _Nonce_ occurs properly only in the phrase _for the nonce_, which is for earlier _for then ones_, where _then_ is the dative of the definite article. Family names like _Nash_, _Nokes_ are aphetic for _atten ash_, at the ash, _atten oakes_, at the oaks. The creation of such forms was perhaps helped by our tendency to use initial _n_ in Christian names, e.g., _Ned_ for _Edward_, _Noll_ for _Oliver_, _Nell_ for _Ellen_.

[Page Heading: AGGLUTINATION OF THE ARTICLE]

Agglutination of the definite article is common in French, e.g., _lingot_, ingot, _lierre_, ivy, for _l'ierre_, Lat. _hedera_, and the dialect _levier_, sink, for _evier_, Lat. _aquarium_, whence Eng.

_ewer_. The derivation of Fr. _landier_, andiron, is unknown, but the _iron_ of the English word is due to folk-etymology. Such agglutination occurs often in family names such as _Langlois_, lit. the Englishman, _Lhuissier_, the usher (see p. 90), and some of these have pa.s.sed into English, e.g., _Levick_ for _l'eveque_, the bishop.

The two words _alarm_ and _alert_ include the Italian definite article.

The first is Ital. _all'arme_, to arms, for _a le arme_, and the second is _all'erta_ for _alla (a la) erta_, the last word representing Lat.

_erecta_. With rolled _r_, _alarm_ becomes _alarum_, whence the aphetic _larum_--

"Then we shall hear their _larum_, and they ours."

(_Coriola.n.u.s_, i. 4.)

Ger. _Larm_, noise, is the same word. In Luther's time we also find _Allerm_.

We have the Arabic definite article in a great many words borrowed from Spanish. _Alcalde_, or _alcade_, and _alguazil_, common in Elizabethan literature, are two old friends from the _Arabian Nights_, the _cadi_ and the _wazir_, or _vizier_. The Arabic article also occurs in _acton_, Old Fr. _auqueton_, now _hoqueton_, for _al qutn_ (cotton), because originally used of a wadded coat--

"But Cranstoun's lance, of more avail, Pierced through, like silk, the Borderer's mail; Through s.h.i.+eld, and jack, and _acton_ past, Deep in his bosom broke at last."

(SCOTT, _Lay_, iii. 6.)

In _alligator_, Span. _el lagarto_, the lizard, from Lat. _lacertus_, we have the Spanish definite article. See also _lariat_, p. 24.

A foreign word ending in a sibilant is sometimes mistaken for a plural.

Thus Old Fr. _a.s.sets_ (_a.s.sez_), enough, Lat. _ad satis_, has given Eng.

_a.s.sets_, plural, with a barbarous, but useful, singular _a.s.set_.

_Cherry_ is for _cheris_, from a dialect form of Fr. _cerise_, and _sherry_ for _sherris_, from _Xeres_ in Spain (see p. 51). Falstaff opines that--

"A good _sherris_-sack[89] hath a twofold operation in it."

(2 _Henry IV._, iv. 3.)

_Pea_ is a false singular from older _pease_, Lat. _pisum_. Perhaps the frequent occurrence of _pease-soup_, not to be distinguished from _pea-soup_, is partly responsible for this mistake. _Marquee_, a large tent, is from Fr. _marquise_. With this we may cla.s.s the heathen _Chinee_ and the _Portugee_. Milton wrote correctly of--

"The barren plains Of Sericana, where _Chineses_ drive With sails and wind their cany waggons light."

(_Paradise Lost_, iii. 438.)

It has been ingeniously suggested that _Yankee_ has been derived in the same way from Du. _Jan Kees_, John Cornelius, supposed to have been a nickname for early Dutch colonists. It is more probably the Dutch dim.

_Janke_, i.e. Johnny. The vulgarism _shay_ for _chaise_[90] is of similar formation. _Corp_, for _corpse_, is also used provincially.

_Kickshaws_ is really a singular from Fr. _quelque chose_--

"Art thou good at these _kickshawses_, knight?"

(_Twelfth Night_, i. 3.)

Cotgrave spells it _quelkchoses_ (s.v. _fricandeau_).

[Page Heading: FALSE SINGULARS AND DOUBLE PLURALS]

_Skate_ has a curious history. It is a false singular from Du.

_schaats_. This is from _escache_, an Old French dialect form of _echa.s.se_, stilt, which was used in the Middle Ages for a wooden leg. It is of German origin, and is related to _shank_. _Cf._, for the sense development, Eng. _patten_, from Fr. _patin_, a derivative of _patte_, foot, cognate with _paw_. _Skates_ are still called _pattens_ by the fenmen of Cambridges.h.i.+re. We also had formerly a doublet from Old Fr.

_escache_ directly, but in the older sense, for Cotgrave has _escha.s.ses_ (_echa.s.ses_), "stilts, or _scatches_ to go on." _Row_, a disturbance, belongs to _rouse_, a jollification--

"The king doth wake to-night and takes his _rouse_."

(_Hamlet_, i. 4.)

of uncertain origin, but probably aphetic for _carouse_, _drink carouse_ being wrongly separated as _drink a rouse_. The bird called a _wheatear_ was formerly called _wheatears_, a corruption of a name best explained by its French equivalent _cul blanc_, "the bird called a whittaile"

(Cotgrave). We may compare the bird-name _redstart_, where _start_ means rump.

Conversely a word used in the plural is sometimes regarded as a singular, the result being a double plural. Many Latin neuter plurals were adopted into French as feminine singulars, e.g., _cornua_, _corne_, horn; _labra_, _levre_, lip; _vela_, _voile_, sail. It is obvious that this is most likely to occur in the case of plurals which are used for a pair, or set, of things, and thus have a kind of collective sense.

_Breeches_ or _breeks_ is a double plural, Anglo-Sax. _brec_ being already the plural of _broc_. In Mid. English we still find _breche_ or _breke_ used of this garment. _Trousers_ was earlier _trouses_, plural of _trouse_, now _trews_, and was used especially of Irish native costume. The latest researches throw doubt on the ident.i.ty of these words with Fr. _trousse_, a page's short breeches. The etymology which now finds most favour is Irish and Gaelic _triubhas_, from Late Lat.

_tubracci_ or _tribracci_, which is supposed to be a corrupted compound from _tibia_, leg, shank, and _braccae_, breeches. _Bodice_ is for _bodies_, as _pence_ is for _pennies_. Cotgrave explains _corset_ by "a paire of _bodies_ for a woman," and the plural sense occurs as late as Harrison Ainsworth--

"A _pair of bodice_ of the c.u.mbrous form in vogue at the beginning of the last century."

(_Jack Sheppard_, Ch. 1.)

_Trace_, of a horse, is the Old Fr. plural _trais_[91] (_traits_) of _trait_, "a teame-trace" (Cotgrave). _Apprentice_ is the plural of Fr.

_apprenti_, formerly _apprentif_, a derivative of _apprendre_, to learn, hence a disciple. _Invoice_ is the plural of the obsolete _invoy_, from Fr. _envoi_, sending.