[Lexicog] embiggen

[Tim Gaved]

Michael,

 

I doubt that the writer would have analysed it linguistically, and realised
the redundancy of “em”. I think it more likely that he knew of the word
“embolden”, and just modelled a new word on that.

 

Tim

 

  _____  

From: lexicographylist at yahoogroups.com
[mailto:lexicographylist at yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Michael Nicholas
Sent: 27 October 2006 07:13
To: lexicographylist at yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Lexicog] embiggen

 

Dear John, 

Very well put. Perhaps the writer realised that the prefix "em" was
redundant but felt it sounded plausible.

John Roberts <dr_john_roberts at sil.org> escribió:

Sebastian Drude asked:
> Are there cases (in English or elswhere) where there is conversion or
> derivation by other means such as _-en_, of an adjective (or noun) X
> into an *intransitive* verb (with the meaning "to become X"?
> In English, in this case, if there is a contrasting pair of derivations
> (_Xen_ -- "to become X" vs. _emXen_ "to make sth. X"), _em-_ could
> arguably be said to carry the transitivizing meaning component.

According to my English affix dictionaries -en2 is the suffix that applies 
in this case. It has four different uses as described below. It is used to 
derive both intransitive and transitive verbs from both adjectives and 
nouns. Interestingly the -en suffix has an OE origin, whereas the em- prefix

has a Latinate origin. That probably explains why they overlap in function.

-en2 is a derivational suffix from OE -n(ian) through ME -nen with four 
functions:

1) derives transitive verbs from an adjective meaning 'to cause to be of a 
condition or quality', e.g. sharp ~ sharpen, dead ~ deaden, bold ~ embolden
Indeed this set of derivations are only transitive and the logical 
structures would be:
sharpen [do' (x, Ø) CAUSE [BECOME sharp' (y)] x sharpened y slowly/for an 
hour
deaden [do' (x, Ø) CAUSE [INGR dead' (y)] x deadened y *slowly/*for an hour
embolden [do' (x, Ø) CAUSE [INGR bold' (y)] x emboldened y *slowly/*for an 
hour

2) derives transitive verbs from nouns, 'to cause to have the quality named'

e.g. long ~ lengthen, strong ~ strengthen, high ~ heighten
Contrary to what the book says these derivations are both transitive and 
intransitive, but only the transitive sense is causative, of course:
lengthen [do' (x, Ø) CAUSE [INGR long' (y)] x lengthened y *slowly/*for an 
hour
INGR long' (y) y lengthened *slowly/*for an hour
strengthen [do' (x, Ø) CAUSE [INGR strong' (y)] x strengthened y 
*slowly/*for an hour
INGR strong' (y) y strengthened *slowly/*for an hour
heighten [do' (x, Ø) CAUSE [INGR high' (y)] x heightened y *slowly/*for an 
hour
INGR high' (y) y heightened *slowly/*for an hour

3) derives intransitive verbs from adjectives meaning 'to become', e.g. 
steep ~ steepen, dark ~ darken, bright ~ brighten
Again contrary to what the book says these derivations are intransitive and 
transitive, and only the transitive sense is causative:
steepen BECOME steep' (y) y steepened slowly/for an hour
[do' (x, Ø) CAUSE [BECOME steep' (y)] x steepened y slowly/for 
an hour
darken BECOME dark' (y) y darkened slowly/for an hour
[do' (x, Ø) CAUSE [BECOME dark' (y)] x darkened y slowly/for an 
hour
brighten BECOME bright' (y) y brightened slowly/for an hour
[do' (x, Ø) CAUSE [BECOME bright' (y)] x brightened y slowly/for 
an hour

4) derives intransitive verbs from nouns meaning 'to have', e.g. leaf ~ 
leafen, breadth ~ breadthen, heart ~ hearten
I could only find 'hearten' in my dictionaries and they say it is both 
intransitive and transitive. (I have 'broaden' but not 'breadthen'.)
hearten INGR have' (x, heart)
[do' (x, Ø)] CAUSE [INGR have' (x, heart)]

But for the following verbs, all of which are only transitive, the 'em-' 
prefix has the same function as the '-en' suffix.

embitter [do' (x, Ø) CAUSE [INGR bitter' (y)] x embittered y *slowly/*for an

hour
embrown [do' (x, Ø) CAUSE [INGR brown' (y)] x embrowned y *slowly/*for an 
hour
embusy [do' (x, Ø) CAUSE [INGR busy' (y)] x embusied y *slowly/*for an hour

So my conclusion is that either the 'em-' or the '-en' is redundant in 
'embiggen'. The sense of [do' (x, Ø) CAUSE [INGR big' (y)] can be expressed 
by either 'embig' or 'biggen'. 'embiggen' says the same thing twice. So the 
'em-' must be being used emphatically here. Can't we ask Homer what he meant

when he coined the term?

John Roberts

 

  

  _____  


LLama Gratis a cualquier PC del Mundo.
Llamadas a fijos y móviles desde 1 céntimo por minuto.
http://es.voice.
<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/mail/es/tagline/messenger/*http:/es.voice.yahoo.com/
> yahoo.com

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lexicography/attachments/20061027/513f7f4d/attachment.htm>