Re: Linguistics
From: Ina May Gaskin (midwifeim@earthlink.net)
Thu Jun 26 10:11:20 2008
German has equally confusing gender assignments to some words, as el
can testify.
Ina May
On 26 Jun 2008, at 07:45, Gerald P. Rodríguez wrote:
> Ef would probably give a better reason, Ann. But best I can tell
> the anatomic words in Spanish have been assigned either masculine
> or feminine without regard to the gender to which they belong.
> Thus it's masculine "el utero" for uterus, but it's "la prostata"
> for prostate. And it's "el pie" (foot), but it's "la
> cabeza" (head). Just to throw a curve into the mix, it's "la
> mano" (hand). Then there is, as in English often more than one
> label for a body part, so "matriz" is perfectly understood by
> Spanish speakers as meaning uterus and it's "la matriz," not "el
> matriz." Perhaps, though I speculate, gender assignment flows from
> the original derivation of the word--Latin vs. Greek?
>
> Gerald P. Rodriguez, M.D., FACOG
> Santa Fe
>
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Meenan, Anna" <annam@uic.edu>
> To: "Multiple recipients of list OB-GYN-L" <ob-gyn-l@mail.obgyn.net>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 9:41 PM
> Subject: Re: Linguistics
>
>> As long as we are on the subject of linguistics, the Spanish
>> language, and masculine vs. feminine nouns: Ef, can you tell me
>> why "el utero" is a masculine noun? It is one of the few things
>> in this world that can NEVER be anything but feminine, and yet it
>> is masculine. That one has always given me pause.
>>
>> Anna Meenan, MD
>>
>>> Que vive el idioma espaÒol.. :)
>>>
>>> Ef
>>>
>>>> At Wed, 25 Jun 2008, Gerald P. RodrÌguez wrote:
>>>>
>>>> °Que viva la idioma EspaÒola!
>>>>
>>>> Gerald P. RodrÌguez, M.D., FACOG
>>>> Santa Fe
>>>>
>>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: R. Daniel Braun
>>>> To: Multiple recipients of list OB-GYN-L
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 9:23 AM
>>>> Subject: Re: Linguistics
>>>>
>>>> That's all fine and good, but if our congressmen don't get off
>>>> their butts and make English, the OFFICIAL language of the good
>>>> ole US of A. we're all going to be speaking Spanish anyway.
>>>>
>>>> Dan
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 11:15 AM, <DoctorJoe@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> In a message dated 6/24/08 11:17:01 PM,
>>>> Stephen.Raymond@dhhs.tas.gov.au writes:
>>>>
>>>> Horrified as I am, I can't resist asking, why logical?
>>>>
>>>> Well, not to beat a dying horse, but ...
>>>>
>>>> Remember that English (and I'm not sure about other
>>>> languages) became somewhat "formalized" after the invention of
>>>> the dictionary. Before then, words were spelled irregularly,
>>>> evidenced by any reproduction of old books and other printed
>>>> materials. The dictionary was a force which regularized the
>>>> language and attempted to keep it that way.
>>>>
>>>> However, with the expansion of the English language (e.g.
>>>> American English, Aussie & Kiwi English, "English" English,
>>>> Indian English), there is a vulgarization of the language in
>>>> different ways and in different areas of the world. In other
>>>> words, it's not just whether you're from London or Liverpool any
>>>> more. And each country is independent of the source of the
>>>> mother tounge now. In fact, there is some sense of pride in
>>>> speaking differently from the Queen.
>>>>
>>>> So too, in large countries like the US of A, there are
>>>> large regional differences (along with regional allegiences and
>>>> pride) which facilitate the very same phenomenon on a more local
>>>> scale, perhaps more dramatic than the local scale of London
>>>> versus Liverpool.
>>>>
>>>> Therefore, it's logical to think that there would be a
>>>> relatively active movement to formalize such differences ("ask"
>>>> versus "axe") from region to region.
>>>>
>>>> Perhaps the most obvious historical example of the above is
>>>> the Roman Empire. Latin was the official language of Rome and
>>>> thence of the Empire. But after the Empire expanded and then
>>>> lost control of the different regions, the vulgar Latin in each
>>>> region became characteristic unto itself, giving us Italian,
>>>> French, Spanish, Portugese, Romanian, etc. About half way
>>>> through the Crusades, Europe fell into the inability to
>>>> understand itself. Languages tend to do that, it seems. There's
>>>> your logic.
>>>>
>>>> Joe P.
>>>>
>>>> P.S. An even more interesting subplot of this phenomenon is
>>>> Italy (and Emilio, correct me if I'm wrong). Each major city or
>>>> center in Italy had its own dialect of Latin/Italian, even into
>>>> relatively recent history. (Not to include Sicilian, which is a
>>>> bit different altogether.) However, when Vittorio Emanuele
>>>> unified the country, he picked Florentine as the official
>>>> language, since Florence/Firenze was the relatively well-
>>>> recognized literary and artistic capital of the country. Thus,
>>>> Italian today is not a subdialect of Latin, it's an artificially
>>>> selected sub-subdialect of Latin.
>>>>
>>>> Ya know -- This stuff is pretty cool!
>>>>
>>>> used cars.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> R. Daniel Braun, MD FACOG(L) ABMP CMTh
>>>> Professor Emeritus
>>>> Dept. of Obstetrics and Gynecology
>>>> Indiana U. School of Medicine
>>>>
>>>> R. Daniel Braun
>>>>
>>>> "Science without Religion is LAME; Religion without Science is
>>>> BLIND"
>>>> Einstein 1941
>>>
>>> --
>>> "I can accept failure, but I can't accept not trying." - Michael
>>> Jordan
>
