o-eheu:Abra - Kadabra - AlakazamGeneric Epithet: Magother (“magical-beast”)“μά&

o-eheu:Abra - Kadabra - AlakazamGeneric Epithet: Magother (“magical-beast”)“μάγος, μάγος, μάγον ” - magical + “θήρ, θηρός ” - animal, beast– > [ μαγο- ] + [ θηρ- ] – stems– > [ μαγοθηρ- ] – new stem implying “magical-beast”– > [ magothēr- ] – Latinized stem= “magothēr, magothēris ” – third-declension masculineSpecific Epithets:Abra: Magother somniculosus (“sleepy magical-beast”)Kadabra: Magother monocochlearius (“single-spooned magical-beast”)“μόνος, μόνη, μόνον ” - sole, alone + “κοχλιάριον, κοχλιαρίου ” - spoon– > [μονο- ] + [κοχλιαριο- ] – stems– >[ μονοκοχλιαριο- ] – new stem implying “single-spoon”– >[ μονοκοχλιαριο- ] + [ ο- ] – with stem of adjectival suffix “-ος ”– >[ μονοκοχλιαρι- ] + [ ο- ] – ending ο in [ μονοκοχλιαριο- ] disappears before [ ο- ]– > [ μονοκοχλιαριο- ] – new stem implying “single-spooned”– > [ monocochleario- ] – Latinized stem (cf. cochlearius)= “monocochlearius, monocochlearia, monocochlearium ” – first-/second-declension adjectiveAlakazam: Magother diplocochlearius (“double-spooned magical-beast”)“διπλόος, διπλόη, διπλόον” - double + “κοχλιάριον, κοχλιαρίου ” - spoon– > [ διπλο- ] + [ κοχλιαριο- ] – stem of short form and stem– > [ διπλοκοχλιαριο- ] – new stem implying “double-spoon”– > [ διπλοκοχλιαριο- ] + [ ο- ] – with stem of adjectival suffix “-ος ”– > [ διπλοκοχλιαρι- ] + [ ο- ] – ending ο in [ διπλοκοχλιαριο- ] disappears before [ ο- ]– > [ διπλοκοχλιαριο- ] – new stem implying “double-spooned”– > [ diplocochleario- ] – Latinized stem (cf. cochlearius)= “diplocochlearius, diplocochlearia, diplocochlearium ” – first-/second-declension adjectiveBene.Something needs to be said about these contracted ο-stem nouns and adjectives. Some of these words are:νόος, stem νοο-, contracted form νοῦς;ὀστέον, stem ὀστεο-, contracted form ὀστοῦν;adjectives ending in -πλόος, “-fold,” such as διπλόος, stem διπλοο-, contracted form διπλοῦς.A problem arises when working with these, and this problem involves a particular question: “When making compounds, should we use the uncontracted stems or the contracted ones?” The thing is that the uncontracted stems end in -εο- and -οο-, and the contracted ones end in -ου-. The former give us combining forms in -εο- and -οο-. The latter, however, should give us combining forms in -οο- (the υ dropping out and replaced with ο), and yet we do not see that actually happening.We see ὀστολογία along with ὀστεολογία, but no ὀστοολογία. One way to account for this ὀστο- is to say that the coiner of the word took the contracted genitive singular form of ὀστοῦν, which is ὀστοῦ, and replaced the final -οῦ with the Connecting Vowel ο, which seems to be what happens usually with regular ο-stems (actually, the Connecting Vowel is the final ο of the stem, and in fact that stem vowel is the origin of the Connecting Vowel ο in Greek). Certain words like ὀστέον/ὀστοῦν have slightly different ways of forming combining forms (i.e. the “regular” way and a way based on a secondary analogy), but I strongly suggest forming combining forms according to the “regular” way, and so ὀστεο- instead of ὀστο-. Modern word-coiners seem to agree, since we have osteoporosis instead of ostoporosis.The same goes for adjectives like χρύσεος, which should appear as χρυσεο- in compounds, as in χρυσεοβόστρυχος. F. Clements says that the first part of χρυσονεριον (chrysonerion) should come from χρύσεος (Greek and Latin in Biological Nomenclature, 354). While this can be explained by pointing out that what is happening here is what is happening with ὀστο- above (i.e. replacing the -οῦ of the genitive singular form ὀστοῦ with ο to get ὀστο-, so replacing the -οῦ of the genitive singular form χρυσοῦ with ο to get χρυσο-), Clements does not seem to recognize any difference between normal ο-stems and these contract words, which is problematic in and of itself. Another problem arises when trying to distinguish a noun like χρυσός, “gold,” and its adjective ending in -εος, χρυσοῦς, “golden.” χρυσός should appear as χρυσο- in compounds, of course, but if we do what Clements suggests, χρυσο- can then represent either χρυσός or χρυσοῦς—the distinction is obliterated! One can say that the distinction between “gold” and “golden” is too fine a distinction to make in compounds, but the distinction is real in Greek (χρυσοφόρος, “wearing gold,” versus χρυσεοβόστρυχος, “with golden tresses”) even if it is not entirely sharp, and that distinction can be expressed if the usual compounding precedure is followed.Adjectives in -πλόος such as διπλόος are different beasts altogether. Those that are used to make compounds have shorter forms in -πλός. Moreover, their combining forms consistently end in a single ο instead of -οο-, and an ο appears in their derivatives as well: e.g. διπλοσήμαντος, διπλοίς. In compound words, that single ο disappears before a vowel as usual, as implied by the verb διπλῳδέομαι (the -ῳδέομαι is denominative from the -ώδης suffix). In the etymological sections of the entries of the combining forms diplo- and haplo- within the the Oxford English Dictionary, there are mentions of ἁπλοῦς and διπλοῦς along with the uncontracted forms ἁπλόος and διπλόος, but there is not any particular explanation of what is going on with the combining forms. The entries for those combining forms at other dictionaries that can be found at OneLook mention either the contracted or the uncontracted forms, but also do not give further information. Printed sources do refer to the shorter forms of the words (Latinized) when giving etymologies of the combining forms: “haplos,” “diplos.”After taking into consideration all of this information about the combining forms of -πλόος words such as διπλόος, there are two ways to explain the single ο: 1) the combining form is derived from -πλός, the shorter form of the -πλόος element: e.g. διπλο- from διπλός, shorter form of διπλόος; 2) what is happening to these words is what is happening with the ὀστο- (i.e. replacing the -οῦ of the genitive singular form ὀστοῦ with ο to get ὀστο-, so replacing the -οῦ of the e.g. genitive singular form διπλοῦ with ο to get διπλο-). I like the first one better because it follows the usual precedure for making combining forms.And so, we have:νόος/νοῦς, stem νοο-, as in νοοποιός;ῥόος/ῥοῦς, stem ῥοο-, as in ῥοόκοκκα;ὀστέον/ὀστοῦν, stem οστεο-, as in ὀστεολογία;χρύσεος/χρυσοῦς, stem χρυσεο-, as in χρυσεοβόστρυχος;χάλκεος/χαλκοῦς, stem χαλκεο-, as in χαλκεόφωνος.And:ἁπλόος/ἁπλοῦς, stem ἁπλοο-, shorter form ἁπλός, stem ἁπλο-, as in ἅπλοθριξ;διπλόος/διπλοῦς, stem διπλοο-, shorter form διπλός, stem διπλο-, as in διπλοσήμαντος.That should suffice for the “rules” for these contracted ο-stem nouns and adjectives. -- source link
Tumblr Blog : o-eheu.tumblr.com

More pics about