Why doesn't anybody talk about the word 'abracadabra'? The OED defines it as a "cabalistic word, formerly used as a charm, and believed to have the power, when written in a triangular arrangement, and worn round the neck, to cure agues, etc. Now often used in the general sense of a spell, or pretended conjuring word; a meaningless word of mysterious sound; jargon, gibberish." I believe it has roots in semitic languages (in Hebrew, "abad" means perish, "ka" means like the, and "dabar" means word) referring to the statement 'perish like the word' which when you repeat it and lose a letter each time, it turns into a triangle. But i have never seen this connection anywhere formal. Has anyone?

poet

abracadabra
abracadabr
abracadab
abracada
abracad
abraca
abrac
abra
abr
ab
a

a
ab
abr
abra
abrac
abraca
abracad
abracada
abracadab
abracadabr
abracadabra

I have seen both form of the triangle (it works better in some fonts than others)
but thea's idea is a new one--

The Word Detective doesn't get too specific about this. For what it's worth: http://www.word-detective.com/121800.html#hocusabracadabra

"Abracadabra" is of semitic origin. It is my understanding that it comes from Aramaic, not from Hebrew but I could be wrong . Abra, however, comes from "bara" (Shoshana, if you are there, would you give the infinitive?) to make or create (as in the opening verses of Genesis: "Bareishit bara Elokim" (in the beginning God made...") The alef (here the vowel 'ah') is [a] future tense of the first person singular (Shoshana, please verify and tweak). The meaning of the expression is, approximately, "I will make as according to your word[s]"

Welcome, thea!

interesting idea. i will have to check my biblical hebrew grammar book when i get home tonight. Historically, the Canaanite language group (which both Hebrew and Phoenician belong to) and the Aramaic language group were distinct by the end of the 2nd Millennium B.C. But there are overlapping words. i know the word for 'perish' is the same in Aramaic and in Hebrew.

The reason i suggested what i did was that i found a replica of a talisman that had the words 'abbada ke dabra' on it saying it meant 'perish like the word'. i am trying to prove or disprove it.



thea iberall, poet and scientist
www.theaiberall.com

Another take: http://www.ccg.org/english/s/p240.html

Google "abracadabra origin" and dig in.

Google "abracadabra origin" and dig in.

Yeah!

Hmmm. But Aramaic was the language of the Babylonian Exile, which is why it is the language of the Babylonian (as opposed to the Jerusalem) Talmud. The Mishna, however, which is at the head of each group of arguments in the Talmud is in Hebrew. Within the very limited vocabulary of this literature, there are a lot of similarities between words of the two languages. Aramaic is also said to be the one language angles cannot understand. That is why the kaddish must always said in a minion: it bipasses the intercession of the angels and goes straight to God's ear.

This is interesting, although I don't recognize abreq ad habra as Hebrew, although Barak *is* Hebrew for lightening. In fact, it sounds more like Aramaic to me. Thea can probably set [me/this] straight.

This kind of interpretation is common in cabalistic and related studies, the "hidden meaning" of a word is revealed by different elisions, additions of vowels, the application of number whose value is represented by the letters themselves. The first two of these techniques for "darshening out" meaning are possible because there are no written vowels in the Hebrew alphabet. While they are often interesting in and of themselves, I doubt they shed much light on etymology.

There is a Greek construction, supposedly by Pythagoras, called the "abraxis". If interest in this subject keeps up, I'll look it up and supply details.

A word related, at least in people's minds, is "hocus-pocus", which is a corruption of the words used in the Latin mass at the consecration of the Host, "Hoc est corpus meus."

<<"Hoc est corpus meus.">>

For the benefit of those of us who never attended church or grammar school?

<<I'll look it up and supply details.>>

Do! :-{| )

This is my body. Reported to have been said by Jesus bar Joseph at his last meal with his followers. Taken by some to be literal truth and by others to be metaphor.

Faldage's reply
Yes, translation correct. This supposedly became a conjuration or part of a charm with medieval "magicians" because these were words of power. According to Roman Catholic teaching, at the moment a duly-ordained priest utters these words during the Mass, having the Host (a special large-sized communion wafer, or other piece of bread) in his hands, the bread is changed from a mere piece of bread to the actual and true body of Jesus Christ. There are regulations as to how this part of the Mass is to be performed; e.g., it is required that the words be spoken all in one breath.

Thanks. :)

Jesus bar Joseph
And there's some Aramaic for you.

it is required that the words be spoken all in one breath.

Guess: more influence of Semitic language. The Hebrew, "ruach" means wind, breath, or spirit. This is another word from the first (second?) verse of Genesis: "v'ruach elokim m'rachepet al p'ne hatachom" "and the spirit of God hovered on the face of the abyss." This could also be translated as the breath of God. And when God breaths the breath of life into Adam (Hebrew for earth*), it is the spirit of life with which He imbues him. "Ruach HaKodesh" is "holy spirit," from which "Holy Ghost" no doubt originates. (This is particularly apt in German, in which both "ghost" and "spirit" are "Geist." I imagine there is a connection between that German and the English "ghost.") To interrupt the breath in the midst of the incantation delivering "breath" to the wafer would be to profane the incantation: to render it unholy (not in an especially perjorative meaning) and incapable of it's agency in the, how do you call it(?) transmutation(?).

*This has bearing on the apparition of the Golem in the anthromorph thread a little while ago.

What do you think?

Disclaimer: I know theological topics raise the hackles of certain posters. Dig not too very deeply here, and will find not the whisp of a hidden evangelist. I find theology interesting and consider it to be completely entwined with the study of language.

IP

<all in one breath>
What you say is, as far as I know, correct and interesting, but I don't think it's what was behind the rule. I believe it was more simple and practical -- to ensure that the change from bread to mystical flesh actually took place. Interrupting the words which effected this change might interrupt the transsubstantiation (the technical term for what occurred). It's like the rule which required (now relaxed) that the bread be placed by the priest directly into the mouth of the communicant. They were afraid that if they put it in the hand so the communicant could put it in his own mouth, some might not eat it, but take it away to use as a charm or for some other impious purpose. There is probably something about this in the writings of St. Thomas Acquinas, who practically invented the doctrine of transubstantiation, but nothing could induce me to drag through that again.

<<to ensure that the change from bread to mystical flesh actually took place>>

<<ensure>> Could you elucidate? Why would the transsubstantiation not take place if the priest paused?

[how do you call it(?) transmutation(?).i]

Transubstantiation : in Roman Catholic faith, the changing of the bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ only the appearance of the bread and wine remaining.
The OED says changing of one substance into another.
wow
Curses! BobY got it in before I could show off!

ensuring transsubstantiation

Don't really know, and don't care, as I don't believe in the doctrine of transsubstantiation. But I do know this was/is big time stuff and no priest would take any chances. The last thing one would want to happen would be for someone to receive a piece of ordinary bread instead of consecrated bread changed into the body of Christ; he would not be in a state of grace and, God forbid, he might die while in a state of sin, and go to hell (or purgatory at least). You may think this is a lot of hair-splitting, but a pious Catholic would take all this most seriously.

Where's Father Steve when you want him? Come to that, where is he anyway -- haven't heard from him in weeks.

<<Don't really know, and don't care>>

Come on, Mr. Youngbalt, that wasn't a question, it was an argument--I'm suggesting the transsubstantiation wouldn't occur because of the broken spirit. ;)

Perfect-- it has to do with the power of word! the glammor of grammer! and it all hocus-pocus! all that missing is the bit of wax that makes it insincere!

is the bit of wax that makes it insincere!

Hear, here.!

They were afraid that if they put it in the hand so the communicant could put it in his own mouth, some might not eat it, but take it away to use as a charm or for some other impious purpose.

You can understand their attitude. The Roman church wasn't about to give up its monopoly on simony, was it?

[Memories of Blackadder as Archibishop of Canterbury sorting through ten-packs of Christ's fingers emoticon]

sorry for the delay in responding. did some checking on the phrase 'abreq ad habra' as the derivation of abracadabra. the supposed meaning 'hurl your thunderbolt even unto death' does not sound hebrew to me. the hebrew word for death is mavet. yes, barak means thunderbolt, abara means 'i will create'. there is also berah meaning fortress, bar meaning son, baruch meaning blessing, and abad meaning perish. without vowels and with meaning being subscribed to things over time, it is hard to say. i personally like the disappearing word meaning since it has a long history to the theory. nothing else i've heard has that depth.

thea


thea, poet and scientist
www.theaiberall.com

i personally like the disappearing word meaning since it has a long history to the theory. nothing else i've heard has that depth.

I like the *sense* of disappearing, but how does the OED find "abad" in "abra?"

it's not the OED that makes the connection between "abbada ke dabra" and "abracadabra". it is just a theory i am trying to track down. i have not found a formal linguistic connection yet, and i am trying to find a linguist that either supports or rejects this theory.

thea, poet and scientist
www.theaiberall.com

it's not the OED that makes the connection between "abbada ke dabra" and "abracadabra". it is just a theory i am trying to track down. i have not found a formal linguistic connection yet, and i am trying to find a linguist that either supports or rejects this theory.

Damned if "thea" isn't lightening.

Obviously, the OED end isn't load bearing end of the question. How do you, how does one get abad out of abra? And do you think you preference may prejudice? You say, "i personally like the disappearing word meaning since it has a long history to the theory. nothing else i've heard has that depth."

You mention a theory, which you say has a long history, but you don't give the theory or evidence its history. If all you wanted to know was whether anyone here had heard of it, you could have had your answer in a post of two letters. I'm guessing you might want a little more engagement. Of course, you are more than welcome to zing around like a buzz bomb if you want, I don't think anyone minds--but you have to understand, it does make it hard to chat. Why don't you pull up a chair and stay a while? The kettle's just boiling.