"oral sex" among th e Victorians + postil(l)ion

[Laurence Horn]

>----- Original Message -----
>From: <RonButters at AOL.COM>
>To: <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
>Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2006 10:47 AM
>Subject: Re:       Re: "oral sex" among the Victorians + postil(l)ion
>
>>---------------------- Information from the mail
>>header -----------------------
>>Sender:       American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
>>Poster:       RonButters at AOL.COM
>>Subject:
>>=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Re:=20=A0=20=A0=20=A0=20Re:=20"oral=20sex"=20amon?
>>              = =?ISO-8859-1?Q?g=20the=20Victorians=20+=20postil(l)ion?=
>>-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>In a message dated 1/11/06 10:04:46 AM, laurence.horn at YALE.EDU writes:
>>
>>>The nice thing about "venery"
>>>is that it could also refer to terms specific to hunting; both
>>>veneries come into Middle English from the same ultimate Latin source
>>>along with "win", "venom", "venison", etc.
>>>
>
>"... the same ultimate Latin source"? My resources are not so good as
>Larry's, but I would think the ultimate source is IE wen- "to desire", one
>"venery" being from L venari "to hunt" and the other from L Venus, -eris
>"love".

I think the proper name "Venus" was a later formation in Latin, but
the lexical item _venus, veneris_ was certainly well established.
When I started to check on these it was to confirm my supposition
that the two "venery" words in English came from different sources,
so I was surprised to find (via the AHD4 Indo-European Dictionary of
Roots) that they're both from PIE wen- 'desire, strive for'.  Whether
Romans felt that the Latin verb ve:na:ri: 'to hunt' was related to
the noun _venus, -eris_ 'love' is an interesting question, but if the
answer is negative, as you suggest, it's an interesting case of
divergence and subsequent convergence (by Middle English, when
"venerie" was used for both), and it would necessitate rewording my
claim as "from the same ultimate Proto-Indo-European source by way of
separate developments in Latin", as you suggest.   Anyone have a time
machine handy?

>Sorry to take you so far away from oral sex.

That's OK, it's an ill lexicographical wind than blows no good.

>Tom
>www.paikeday.net
>
>>
>>This allowed Sir Thomas Wyatt in the 16th century to pun extensively in
>>his
>>sonnet that begins;
>>
>>Whoso list to hunt, I know where is a hind,
>>But as for me I can no more.
>>The vain travail has wearied me so sore,
>>I am of them that furthest come behind.
>>
>>Supposedly, the poem was written about his squashed love affair with the
>>queen.