Earlier this month in AWAD, we were presented with the word defenestration. In our house, it brought up the question, Is there a word for throwing someone or something out the door?
One good word deserves another.

Exportation oand deportation have already been taken. But janus was also door (a janitor was the holder of the keys to the house). How about dejanuation? We could also try for a Greekish word: dethyronization.

I prefer the first. The second sounds like a medical treatment for a thyroid deficiency.

I think we should just overload deportation; certainly context would tell all: his boisterous drunkenness led to deportation by the bouncer.

edit: actually, according to OED2, we're already there; just ignore the esp.

1. The action of carrying away; forcible removal, esp. into exile

I knew a bartender back in Flagstaff who would deport drunks by pointing at them and gesturing towards the door with his thumb. It worked every time because they all knew that if they didn't go quietly he would just toss them out. Without opening the door first. The door was solid oak.

Yikes.

Deportation might work....makes sense once you think of it. Maybe Deportalization(or deportalisation)

Transfenestration? i saw this in thomas pynchon's Vineland recently, referring to someone deliberately jumping through a closed window. pynchon used the concept previously on the first page of V, wherein a drunk Marine was contemplating shouting Geronimo before or after jumping through a plate glass window

I suspect the common meanings of deportation and exportation would come from the masculine, portus, 'sea port' rather than from the feminine porta, 'door'.

from the masculine, portus, 'sea port' rather than from the feminine porta, 'door'.

The -port in deport and export comes from the Latin porto, portare, to carry'.

portare, to carry' Aha: portage!

So, is there a relation between 'carry', 'door', and 'seaport'?

So, is there a relation between 'carry', 'door', and 'seaport'?

Yes, in Latin, porta 'gate; door', porto 'to carry', and portus 'entrance; harbor'] are all related. They are from PIE *per-, *perə- 'to transport, carry over; to come across; to translate; to pentrate; to fly'. Congeners in other IE languages are German fahren 'to drive, ride, travel', English fare, ferry, English ford, Greek Ευφράτης (Euphratēs) 'Euphrates', literally 'good ford', by folk etymology from Akkadian Purattu, cf. Sumerian Buranun.

'Euphrates', literally 'good ford' Eureka! Good...good what, please?

ford. like ford the stream, perhaps?

ford. like ford the stream, perhaps?

Yes, Cody, it's not the automobile, it's a shallow place in a creek, river, what have you where things can get through without getting too wet. Oxford (< Oxenford) 'cow ford'.

Eureka! Good...good what, please?

If only. Nope the eu- in euphemism, euthanasia, and eucharistic is from the PIE root *su- 'good', but the eu- in eureka 'I have found (it)' is from PIE *wer- 'to find'. Different roots.

...it's a shallow place in a creek, river, what have you where things can get through without getting too wet. Oxford...

I feel there's something just below the surface of the Thames, here.

ah, now after re-reading Jackie's post, I finally make sense of what she was asking.

/slaps himself upside of his ownself's head.

Butt... for the kick in the butt to get one out of the door could it be exportare?

the eu- in eureka 'I have found (it)' is from PIE *wer- 'to find'. Different roots. How reud of it. I was just sure that reka meant the equivalent of "news". Thanks, though.

That's -angelos. Well, actually angelos means 'messenger', but euangelos means 'good news'.

euangelos means 'good news'

Actually, εὐαγγέλιον (euaggelion) means 'a reward of good tidings' (i.e., the tip you gave a messanger bringing good news), in the plural it was used in the sense of 'good news', and εὐάγγελος (euaggelos) means 'bringing good news'. (Adjectives in Greek could be used as nouns without change.)

(Adjectives in Greek could be used as nouns without change.)
Hey, tsuwm: the Greeks nouned adjectives!

the Greeks nouned adjectives!

Many languages do. The Romans did. You can do it in German. Sanskrit comes to mind. Of course, in Chinese, most words are nouns, adjectives, and adverbs with no morphological changes.

Just a question, since I don't know really how PIE works,
would they not all trace back to a common word?

would they not all trace back to a common word?

Well, it's hard to reconstruct words in PIE. What's usually being done is reconstructing roots. A lot of work needs to be done on the morphology and grammar of PIE. But above in one of my posts, I said that porta 'gate', portus 'port', and the -port verbs all trace back to a PIE root.

Here is the beginning of a Wikipedia article on what PIE is: The Proto-Indo-European language (PIE) is the unattested, reconstructed common ancestor of the Indo-European languages, spoken by the Proto-Indo-Europeans. The existence of such a language has been accepted by linguists for over a century, and there have been many attempts at reconstruction. Nevertheless, many disagreements and uncertainties remain.
link
I leave it to the experts to point out any flaws.

And here is part of an article I read with great interest: Kathleen Hubbard's answer to the question "How do we know what we know about Proto-Indo-European and other languages that died out before they were written down? [Kathleen is assistant professor of linguistics at the University of California, San Diego. She describes herself as a "recovering Indo-Europeanist."]
link

PIE is a textbook example of the concept of a SWAG.

I leave it to the experts to point out any flaws.

They're both pretty good as short introductions to IE philology. Points of disagreement would not necessarily be flaws. As in many academic pursuits, there are differences of opinion and competing explanations (the latter of which are usually called theories by linguists).

For those who want to get more in-depth feel for the field, I'd suggest:

1. Robert Beekes. 1995. Comparative Indo-European Linguistics: An Introduction.

2. Winfred P Lehmann. 1993. Theoretical Bases of Indo-European Linguistics.

3. Calvert Watkins. 1995. How to Kill a Dragon: Aspects of Indo-European Poetics.

A good library should either have them or be able to get one, and they're all still in print or available from used bookstores.

[Edit: fixed up the language per later posts in the thread.]

Thank you, all, and thanks for the links too.
I am appreciative. Learning much.

I suppose you got to start with number 1.? I feel more like
Killing the Dragon at once, but that I suppose is meant as a reward for having read the other two ? ;-)

having read the other two Branny! Holy cow!! Good for you!!! I haven't even heard of them! [deep bow]

I see what you did there...

i am just coming to an understanding of this but i had gained an impression that if enough people used a word in a certain way then it meant wat its users understood it to mean, even if it used differently by other groups of users. or is this an(other) instance of my belief that i know some english being decimated?

I see what you did there...
Thats a reward for having read the post properly

but that I suppose is meant as a reward for having read the other two ? ;-)

How should it have been to make clear I surely did not ( yet) read the other two? (for I don't see what you did there, tears blinding my eyes @-@)

Faldage's Hypothesis on Language Change states that the language is reinvented every generation. The efforts of well-meaning prescriptivists may put the brakes on this process, but, like any brakes on an unstoppable force, they will eventually burn out.

i am just coming to an understanding of this but i had gained an impression that if enough people used a word in a certain way then it meant wat its users understood it to mean, even if it used differently by other groups of users. or is this an(other) instance of my belief that i know some english being decimated?

Yes, you're right. Linguists use the word theory differently from scientists, and I was trying to stop complaints about social sciences not really being science, etc. I'll go back and change it. (Also, nothing says that linguists have to be happy when words or their meanings change, they just don't try to explain it away as the result of kids messing with the language.)

Faldage's Hypothesis on Language Change states that the language is reinvented every generation.

zmj's SWAG states that language change happens between discoursing subjects. It is an epiphenomenon of communication. The meaning of words is determined by custom, usage, and context (all of which are subject to change).

olly--c'mere a minute, Buster: I have something for you!

You're right, though; I did the same thing I got marked down for all through school: rushing through and thus making errors.
[hug]

I understood you perfectly Bran; I think Ma just rushed through a bit too quickly.

I'm with doc c here. I had no problem understanding and wonder why Jackie made the unwarranted leap that she did.

And, Jackie? I don't need none, so don't bother offering.

"Ma"?!?!

And I thought Jackie was having a good joke!

I think so too now, but I thought I made a real grammar mistake.
(I'm still not sure about how I could avoid the double interpretableness.)

All right, dag nab it! I was NOT making a joke; there was NO grammar mistake. *I* made a mistake! (Yes, I know that this is the first time...) And old Doc Comfort can count himself lucky I didn't call him Pops.