Here's a curiosity that has me overwrought (not wreally):

Is there some kind of relationship in the number of words in English that begin with wr- and seem to have some idea of twisting? For instance ...

wrest, wrestle, wrap, wreath, wraith?, wrinkle, wretch, wretched, wreck, wrist?, wrath, writhe, wriggle, wring, wreak?, wrangle

I think that you have found a faux relationship between words beginning with "wr" and a meaning of "twist". Almost all of the English words which begin with "wr" are direct descendants of Old English word roots and therefore have a long history in our current language. "Wr" was a common formation in Old English.

Welcome, lslslsl, to the fold. I have no idea, but Faldage will know. Faldage knows (almost) everything.

Faldage knows (almost) everything

In a biblical sense anyway, Padre!

In a biblical sense

Aw, c'mon, Pfranz. I don't know any more about the Bible than you do.

As for those words, many of them derive from the same PIE root, even some for which I thought the connection with twisting was a bit tenuous:

http://www.bartleby.com/61/roots/IE571.html

Hey, I tried looking it up in Bartleby and didn't find anything. What's your secret?

I looked up one of the wr- words and clicked on the clickable link to the PIE Root Appendix.

I think that you have found a faux relationship between words beginning with "wr" and a meaning of "twist".

IsIsIs will explain for herself, but I don't think IsIsIs was postulating a connection between "wr" words and the word "twist" itself, only a connection between "wr" words and the idea of 'twisting'.

She could have said "entwine", "twirl" or even "wrench", instead.

Personally, I think IsIsIs has got something there.

"wr" words have a certain "wring" to them.

No wonder we try to wring as much value out of the sound as we can.

Good insight, IsIsIs.

If this is a sample of what is to come, Grapho, for one, is looking forward to more IsIsIs.

I just hope we can figure out a way to abbreviate your moniker.

May I call you Izz for short?

Or how about "Wrizz"?

What's faux about the relationship? A goodly number of IsIsIs' words are assumed to be related to one another. That's what the roots in the PIE roots appendix in the A-H dictionary are. (Of course, anybody is free not to believe in them or ignore them, or to come up with an alternate answer to why these words in English, and a whole slew of other languages have systematic correspondences of form and meaning.) But, if s/he means that somehow the sounds /w/ and /r/ have something to do with twisting and turning, then we part company. The other words in the list that are not related to the *wer- root(s) prove that.

But, if s/he means that somehow the sounds /w/ and /r/ have something to do with twisting and turning, then we part company. The other words in the list that are not related to the *wer- root(s) prove that.

"The stars impel, they do not compel", jheem.

The "wr" sound at the beginning of a word might have impelled the creation of words with a meaning harmonious with the "wr" sound.

Words like the words IsIsIs has enumerated so persuasively.

Since this was an innate predisposition, not the result of systematic or even conscious selection, many "wr" words would and did arise which had nothing to do with the idea of 'twisting'.

That doesn't make IsIsIs' postulation any less tenable.

I don't know anything about those "PIE roots" of yours, but common sense trumps rhubarb pie any day.

I said you were free to go off on your own course in these matters, and you have. Bon voyage.

I said you were free to go off on your own course in these matters, and you have. Bon voyage.

Are you trying to wriggle out of a good argument, jheem.

It seems a shame, you were so close to winning me over.

Convincing IsIsIs that her thesis is "faux" is something else altogether.

In any event, thanks for the PIE in my eye.

It was the twisting and turning part that I believe were "fauz". The PIE-based relationship isn't even an issue ...

The PIE-based relationship isn't even an issue

I'm really wrestling to understand the basis of your "faux" judgment, Capfka.

Returning to your original statement:

Almost all of the English words which begin with "wr" are direct descendants of Old English word roots and therefore have a long history in our current language.

OK, I'm sure you are right. But how does that cast doubt on IsIsIs' proposition?

All she is saying is that there is some very compelling circumstantial evidence that the meaning of many "wr" words arose in sympathy with the sound they produced.

In other words, IsIsIs is postulating an onomatopoeic relationship.

That sounds like a very plausible thesis to me, and her list of examples is impressive.

Also, I think her argument is intuitively sound. [That's not a pun by the way. On second thought, yes it is.]

I think IsIsIs has made a prima facie case and she is entitled to a fair hearing, all the more so because she is a "Stranger" and she may not understand all this PIE in the sky and "Old English word root" business [wherever you are digging up those "roots"].

I don't understand why the case IsIsIs has made has been dismissed so presumptuously, and I've been around a lot longer than IsIsIs has.

Still I'm willing to learn, and I'm sure IsIsIs is as well.

It would be very nice if you [or someone] would take the time to explain your argument in terms which ordinary people [like myself] can comprehend.

Thank u in advance for your generous attention.

OK, I see.

the twisting and turning part that I believe were "fauz"

Being the PIE root of many of lslslsls's words meant to turn, bend…

Being the PIE root of many of lslslsls's words meant to turn, bend…

"It would be very nice if you [or someone] would take the time to explain your argument in terms which ordinary people [like myself] can comprehend.

Thank u in advance for your generous attention."

I'm not disputing that, Faldo. What I am disputing is the linkage between that and the use of "wr" as being a causal relationship. The assumption would be, were it true, that all words beginning with "wr" would have some sense of twisting. You can only establish that by some very judicious glossing of the meaning of the words.

Yes, I've never given much credence to sound symbolism. The arbitrary nature of the linguistic sign is good enough for me.

The assumption would be, were it true, that all words beginning with "wr" would have some sense of twisting.

Why is "all", or even "most" a necessary condition, Capfka?

You would only expect to see such a dominant pattern if the pattern was systematically imposed from above, rather than intermittently, but persistently, from below.

I truly don't know where you are digging up your "Old English roots", Capfka, but I suspect there was no rule book around when those roots were planted.

I can understand why you guys would want to pull all this square root of PIE business on me, but is it fair to pull it on IsIsIs?

I'm not disputing that, Faldo. What I am disputing is the linkage between that and the use of "wr" as being a causal relationship. The assumption would be, were it true, that all words beginning with "wr" would have some sense of twisting. You can only establish that by some very judicious glossing of the meaning of the words.

I like what you write, Pfranz. I don't think you're wrong.

the linkage between that and the use of "wr" as being a causal relationship.

Well, failing lslslsls coming back and explaining I can only say that I didn't read that assumption into the words. The words in question start with wr because they are a subset of the wer- rooted words that do that. There were other groups of wer- rooted words that don't have that and some words that start with wr that don't come from wer-. Wright, for example, comes from werg-, to do. But other than that all the words in the AHD4 that begin with wr and are traced back to PIE trace back to wer-.

Faldage, what is PIE? I don't know what you guys are talking about.

The words in question start with wr because they are a subset of the wer- rooted words that do that.

I'm beginning to follow your argument, Faldage. Thank you for adding some details.

Are you saying that all or most of IsIsIs' examples are derived from words that start with "wer"?

The sound of "wer" is the same sound as "whirl" and "whirr", both of which get at the 'twisting' idea that IsIsIs is postulating for words beginning with "wr".

You have just made a very strong case, Faldage, that the "wr" words in IsIsIs' list are originally derived from "wer" words, and the association with 'twisting' which she has postulated is not happenstance, but causal.

I really can't expect you to agree with me under any circumstances, Faldage, but can you agree with IsIsIs, a newcomer, that her postulation of a connection between "wr" words [originally "wer" words] and the idea of 'twisting' or 'turning' is compelling, and deserving of due, albeit reluctant and belated, recognition?

belMarduk: PIE == Proto-Indo-European. It's a reconstructed language from which most of the languages in Europe and a goodly number of those in South Asia descend. See:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-European_languages

Hmmm, thanks jheem. It's very interesting. I got lost in hte link pages there. I'm gonna have to take a few hours to go through everything.

Well, failing lslslsls coming back and explaining I can only say ...
Here's lslslsls coming back and, probably, failing ... Now that I've had time to absorb that entry from Bartleby/PIE/AHD4, I see that the pattern I picked up on wasn't happenstance. I'm not sure what constitutes a causal relationship here--two questions arise. Are many of the wr- words effects of the common cause of the PIE wer- root? Obviously. Was there some kind of onomatopoeic cause of the wer- root having the meaning of turning? Perhaps it could have been the twisting up of the mouth to make the more emphatic -r- sound, but that's just silly speculation (silliness never stopped me before).
By the way, the issue came up for me a while back when I was doing a study of the wrath of God--I wanted to get to the 'root' of that. I've returned to the study in the last few weeks for a Bible study appropriate to this season in which I'm looking again at how, Christians believe, God turned his wrath on himself--in his Son--in the suffering of Christ.
Thanks for letting me spark a delightful conversation. My moniker is simply from my initials, 4 times--my name being Larry. Pleased to meet you all.

Are many of the wr- words effects of the common cause of the PIE wer- root? Obviously.

In fairness, I think we have Faldage to thank for that piece of the evidentiary puzzle. That (on top of the obvious onamatopoeic association) is what convinced me you were right as well.

Great insight of yours, IsIsIs.

It is well understood that so-called outsiders are often the best innovators because they are not confined by traditional habits of thinking [what our own AWADian, of Troy, would call "the existing paradigm"].

Also, they 'cross pollinate' by bringing new insights from other fields of expertise.

This is not to denigrate experts in any field in any way, of course, including people who are knowledgeable about "PIE" or "Old English roots" because their knowledge and research is the basis for new advances.

It was, after all, Faldage who provided the connection between "wr" words and "wer" words which clinched the case for your thesis.

I am glad you are getting the recognition you deserve, IsIsIs, but I do not think we should overlook the value of our own homegrown experts.

Glad you enjoyed the discussion. We all enjoyed it, I'm sure.

Perhaps it could have been the twisting up of the mouth to make the more emphatic -r- sound, but that's just silly speculation

Not necessarily silly, but it should be remembered that it's likely that the /r/ sound wasn't originally pronounced with a twisting up of the mouth but with a flap of the tip of the tongue against the top of the mouth just behind the teeth.

My moniker is simply from my initials, 4 times--my name being Larry

Welcome, Larry! And, aside from the interesting wr discussion, thanks for clearing up your name. When I first saw it, I wasn't completely sure if I was looking at lower-case Ls or upper-case Is. (IsisIsis being more pronounceable than lslslsls ) Even though the upper-case I has serifs and the lower-case l doesn't...never mind

Not necessarily silly

You have made a valuable contribution to this discussion, Faldage.

I do hope we can get beyond our personal 'duelling' for the benefit of future discussions and the AWAD community at large.

Our future discussions may not be as "delighful" but, at least, they will be more focused on the subject of the discussion.

I don't expect you to agree with me about what we discuss, Faldage, but only about the way we approach discussion.

Besides, if you start agreeing with me too often, I might have to start disagreeing with myself.

For a gnat, that's like biting the hand that feeds him.

And that's just .

Are many of the wr- words effects of the common cause of the PIE wer- root? Obviously. Was there some kind of onomatopoeic cause of the wer- root having the meaning of turning? Perhaps it could have been the twisting up of the mouth to make the more emphatic -r- sound, but that's just silly speculation (silliness never stopped me before).

Larry, if I understand you correctly, you're asking if the sounds of the *wer- root were onomatopoeic in origin. Both in the case of PIE and English, I don't think so.

There are 13 reconstructed roots in the form *wer- in Pokorny's dictionary (Indogermanisches Etymologisches Wörterbuch. This is the standard reference in the field and is quoted by page number in the Indo-European Roots appendix (by Calvert Watkins at Harvard) in the American-Heritage Dictionary (online and in print). These roots and their meanings are:

1. wer- 'to bind, fasten, join; suspend; (in weighing also) heavy; line, cord'

2. wer- 'elevated place'

3. wer- 'to turn, twist; bend, curve'; this is our root with more than seven pages for the entry.

4. wer- 'to find, discover; take'

5. wer- 'to close, cover, lock; protect; save, rescue'

6. wer- 'to say or speak (solemnly)' : our word word is from this root wr-dho-

7. wer- 'to tear, rip; scratch'

8. wer- 'to perceive, be aware of; pay attention, heed'

9. wer- adj. 'wide, broad'

10. wer- 'river; to flow'

11. wer- 'to prove one's friendship'

12. wer- 'to burn, scorch'

13. wer- 'squirrel'

So, at least in PIE, there were a lot of roots that didn't mean twist, many of which did not leave a trace in English vocabularywise. But these 13 roots left lots of words in all the other IE languages, which were used to reconstruct the roots and their meanings.

A note about the roots. Any root in PIE, can take a number of shapes, called grades: the e-grade (e.g., *wer), which is the form usually cited in dictionaries, the o-grade, (e.g., *wor-), and the zero-grade (e.g., wr-). It is the zero-grade of wer- that most of the English words in your list come from.

Now, I suppose you could argue that only the words from the third wer- root survived into English because, the Anglo-Saxon, started to associate words beginning in wr- with twisting and surpressed the other words ...

For more info, you might check out the link to Wikipedia on IE languages that I posted earlier in this thread.

Now, I suppose you could argue that only the words from the third wer- root survived into English because, the Anglo-Saxon, started to associate words beginning in wr- with twisting and surpressed the other words ...

Very thoughtful, knowledgeable, dispassionate and uncondescending analysis, jheem.

I am sure IsIsIs will learn something from it. I know I have.

here's more PIE:
http://www.comics.com/comics/getfuzzy/archive/getfuzzy-20040320.html

getfuzzy

That's why they've taken to showing the descendant languages in a pie chart in the AHD.

http://www.bartleby.com/61/images/indoeuro.jpg

I do so love Get Fuzzy. What's PIE for "pie"?

PIE for "pie"

I dunno. Anyone got a good English to PIE dictionary?

just silly speculation (silliness never stopped me before).
Oh, please stay with us. Please, please, please ... we need all the silliness we can round up!
Welcome, Larry.

Well, did they have "pies" 6K BP?