Editor for this issue: <>
A slight deviation from your subject, but very much related: What about 'buttering', 'salting', 'sugaring' as terms to imply addition and 'milking' meaning 'to take away milk' rather than 'to add milk'. Regards Caroline Ogden, University of Herts, 1st year.Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
Content-Length: 770 Sorry I haven't commented earlier, but I have been collecting examples of these words for several years without having a name for them. I have one class or type with at least 3 members: Words that mean both movement and inability to move. Examples: fast, bolt, bound The last word yielded one of the all-time great movie song lyric puns, from the Title song of "Road to Morroco": "Like Webster's Dictionary, we're Morroco-bound..."! I also believe the following word has not been mentioned: It now seems to mean both to illuminate, clarify, and also to cast a shadow over... Anyway, when I find my list, I'll have more. As for other languages, Russian predat' means both to devote and to betray. --Jules Levin University of California Riverside, CA 92521Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
Content-Length: 1948 Unless I missed something on the list, I think the well known semitic phenomenon of words with contradictory meanings has not been mentioned. Many of them exist, I can think now of: the root y.sh.v in Hebrew 'to sit' and its Arabic counterpart w.th.b 'to jump up from one's seat'. The root 'sh.kh.ch. (i.e. Kaf and Het) appears in a word meaning 'to forget' as well as in another one meaning 'to prevail'. The root p.q.d. appears in the verb 'nifqad' meaning 'to be absent' as well as 'to be counted as present'. Originally meanings were opposite in different languages but mutual loans and internal semantic developments complicate matters. I am sure that more active semitist can come up with many another more famous stock examples. Oh, yes: sh.r.v. in Hebrew 'extreme heat/dry weather' sh.r.b. in Arabic 'to drink'. The double meaning of sh.kh.ch created a famous popular misinterpretation of an Aramaic proverb: chaval `al de-'avdin, we-la mishtakchin This is said in eulogies, originally being a tautological paralellism, meaning roughly: Too bad that those are lost, and not present [anymore] but today understood as: Too bad that those are lost, and not to be forgotten. Ron KuzarMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
I didn't follow this discussion, but my reaction is: 'altus' only means its own opposite when translated into English (or other languages). 'altus' means "altus", full stop. It's more a property of the sea (cf. German 'auf hoher See') that it is 'high' and 'deep' at the same time, depending on perspective; Latin choses to use the same expression for both perspectives. Hartmut HaberlandMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
Content-Length: 1696 Re RISK, Chuck Fillmore has written terrifically insightfully about this fascinating word, and discusses this question (along with others): see Fillmore, C. and Atkins, S. 1992. Toward a frame-based lexicon: the semantics of RISK and its neighbours. In Lehrer and Kittay (Eds), 75-102. [Unfortunately I seem to have lost my card for Lehrer and Kittay 1992; if anyone wants it I may be able to dig it out.] He and Sue Atkins point out that the object of RISK can be either the good thing that you are putting into jeopardy (risk your life) or the bad thing that lies in wait for you (risk a telling off). Interestingly, as a side issue, it's the only case I know of where a gerund is distinct from other NPs: you can risk missing the plane (neg), but you can't risk catching it (pos), though you can risk an accident (neg) or your life (pos). Dick Hudson Dept of Phonetics and Linguistics, University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT uclyrahMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issueucl.ac.uk
Content-Length: 849 Date sent: 8-FEB-1995 23:35:26 ) )Then there is the curious case of the word "yet", which, as far as I know, )formerly meant almost the same as German "noch", but has shifted, through )"not yet", esp. in questions, to German "schon". But here in Toledo there are )people (my wife), who uze it in both meanings--the syntax alone shows which. "noch" does mean yet, as in the sentance, "noch nicht," "not yet," But it can also mean another, "moechtest du noch eine Tasse Wein" "would you like another glass of wine." "Schon" is really "already", "ich studiere Deutsch scho sieber Jahren" "I am studying German already four years [lit] " or "hast du dass schon gemacht?" "have you already done that". Yes, syntax ( as usual) determines the meaning of a word, but I haven't heard "schon" used for "not yet" unless accompanied with "nicht".Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue