Wordsmith Talk |
About Us | What's New | Search | Site Map | Contact Us | |||
Register Log In Wordsmith Talk Forums General Topics Miscellany Why are "roots" so unrelated to derived words?
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
How does one get from a "root" like "bhel" to the Latin "fulgere" (for example)? This sort of thing mystifies me no end.
E.g., for the word "refulgent" I see:
From Latin refulgere (to radiate light, to reflect), from re- (back) + fulgere (to shine). Ultimately from the Indo-European root bhel- (to shine or burn), which is also the source of blaze, blank, blond, bleach, blanket, and flame. Earliest documented use: before 1500.
Entire Thread Subject Posted By Posted ![]()
Why are "roots" so unrelated to derived words?
dakkumar 09/01/2011 8:26 AM ![]()
Re: Why are "roots" so unrelated to derived words?
Faldage 09/01/2011 10:13 AM ![]()
Re: what Faldo said
zmjezhd 09/01/2011 1:20 PM ![]()
Re: Why are "roots" so unrelated to derived words?
LukeJavan8 09/01/2011 3:57 PM ![]()
Re: Why are "roots" so unrelated to derived words?
Jackie 09/02/2011 12:45 AM ![]()
Re: Why are "roots" so unrelated to derived words?
LukeJavan8 09/02/2011 3:50 PM ![]()
Re: Why are "roots" so unrelated to derived words?
Jackie 09/03/2011 1:52 AM
Moderated by Jackie
Link Copied to Clipboard
Forum Rules · Mark All Read Contact Us · Forum Help · Wordsmith Talk