Timeline for effeminare = evirare (?)
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 10 at 2:55 | history | edited | Cerberus♦ | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
deleted 2 characters in body
|
| Apr 7 at 15:54 | comment | added | Mitomino | @cmw Sorry, I forgot to reply to your last comment. In the case of effeminare, the root is a noun but it does not express an entity but rather a property, which makes it compatible with efferare, emollire, exclarare, exhilarare, etc. The alleged meaning of the Ground Object construction for virum effeminare is not available in Latin with your intended/"creation" meaning but, if any, could only be available with the opposite meaning (cf. exoculare, edentare, etc.): 'to remove the woman (Figure) from the man (Ground)'. | |
| May 6, 2021 at 1:25 | comment | added | cmw♦ | @mitomino Yes, I understand what you were saying better now. I don't think the Catalan is necessary here, edulco should suffice, though I don't see it in Lewis and Short and don't have the OLD at home. But it makes sense that the ex is referring to the direct object after the verb: virum effeminare -> to bring the woman out of the man, almost a shorthand (forgot the linguistic term for this construction) for *feminare ex viro. | |
| May 6, 2021 at 0:04 | comment | added | Mitomino | @cmw The relevant reference/monograph mentioned by Gibert-Sotelo (2017) is the following one, which, unfortunately, I don't have at my disposal now. Brachet, Jean-Paul (2000). Recherches sur les préverbes de- et ex- du latin. Bruxelles: Latomus. | |
| May 5, 2021 at 23:33 | comment | added | Mitomino | This quote from Gibert-Sotelo (2017:325) can be a bit illuminating: "Brachet (2000) concludes that the primitive function of the prefix was that of introducing a complement specifying the initial state of a change of state event, an initial state that happens to be the opposite state of that expressed by the (“adjectival”) root and that corresponds to an inherent condition of the entity undergoing change (which is that of being masculine in the case of effemino ‘to make feminine’, that of being bitter in the case of edulco ‘to sweeten’,...)". tdx.cat/handle/10803/461414#page=1 | |
| May 5, 2021 at 19:56 | comment | added | cmw♦ | @Mitomino Do you have a specific comparison to your derivation of effeminare? | |
| May 5, 2021 at 16:04 | comment | added | Cerberus♦ | @Mitomino: Don't you think it's odd how a verb with ec- should specify the goal as its direct object? None of the other verbs do this, with the possible exception of effero. Why not simply femino instead? That would already mean "to change into a woman" without the praefix. So what does it really add? | |
| May 5, 2021 at 14:14 | comment | added | Mitomino | Many thanks for your interesting answer. I'm not convinced by your proposal that the prefix of the verb effeminare has an intensive meaning ('thoroughly/completely'). Rather my intuition is that the prefix here maintains its original meaning (it expresses a source). In my opinion, the paraphrase put forward by Lewis & Short is very appropriate: 'to change out of his own nature into that of a woman'. It seems that the nominal root of evirare specifies the source (vir) but not the goal, whereas the root of effeminare specifies the goal (femina) but not the source. | |
| May 5, 2021 at 0:44 | history | edited | Cerberus♦ | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 8 characters in body
|
| May 5, 2021 at 0:39 | history | answered | Cerberus♦ | CC BY-SA 4.0 |