I was researching the etymology of 'legacy' when I saw that lex was imputed to PIE *leg-. Why? How does law or contracts relate to collecting and gathering?

Etymonline (see link above) mentions that *leg- is a Proto-Indo-European root meaning "to collect, gather."

  • 1
    I warmly recommend that you ask your questions in a format closer to what I edited this one into. Keep to the point and don't quote Etymonline entries. You can give a link and quote a couple of words as needed. If you want to make a question longer, do so by adding your own elaboration written in paragraphs of text. Also, please remember that not everything in languages and etymology can be made sense of. Etymology does not imply meaning. – Joonas Ilmavirta Jul 19 '19 at 7:43

Lewis and Short connect lex to ligo instead of lego. Either way, the word lex seems to have no visible connection to collecting or binding or anything like that. Perhaps a law was originally considered to be a collection of edicts or something that binds people? Either verb makes some sense.

How a word like lex evolved to mean what it means is a good question, but can be too difficult to answer. The entry in L&S makes no mention of any meanings that would be closer to an "underlying meaning". This seems to be yet another word that has cut its ties to its own etymology: its history does not dictate what it is but it has started an independent life of its own.

  • I could cite (in the interest of increasing confusion) religio as another kind of "binding". Laws do bind, after all. – Martin Kochanski Jul 19 '19 at 8:17
  • @MartinKochanski Good point! I had meant to have an interpretation of law using both lego and ligo. I now added the binding view. (Regarding your recent flag, you can see a response on your flag page. If you want to discuss further, I suggest chat or meta.) – Joonas Ilmavirta Jul 19 '19 at 8:21
  • Since I can't tell both verbs appart, I figure they, or the roots, were once one and diverged; lex might be parallel to, not descended from them. It might be formed analogous to rex. Further rect, ultimately of the same root, is so close to ex, semantically, that it's worthwhile to assume the themes were separate roots; I had wondered vocally about a **le- before. Only after having learned about *Hel- "grow; beyond" (cf all) now I realized that it could be a theme. However, that could be secondary and I'm not going to go crazy about it. – vectory Nov 9 '19 at 2:55

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.