Wordsmith.org: the magic of words

Wordsmith Talk

About Us | What's New | Search | Site Map | Contact Us  

Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2
#180356 11/17/08 11:34 AM
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,295
Carpal Tunnel
OP Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,295
log (n.) 1398, of unknown origin. O.N. had lag "felled tree" (from stem of liggja "to lie"), but on phonological grounds etymologists deny that this is the root of Eng. log. Instead, they suggest an independent formation meant to "express the notion of something massive by a word of appropriate sound." Logging "act of cutting timber" is from 1706. Logjam "congestion of logs on a river" is from 1885; in the figurative sense it is from 1890. Logrolling in the legislative vote-trading sense first recorded 1823, from the notion of neighbors on the frontier helping one another with the heavy work of clearing land and building cabins (as in phrase you roll my log and I'll roll yours). Log cabin in Amer.Eng. has been a figure of the honest pioneer since the 1840 presidential campaign of William Henry Harrison.
log (v.)

"to enter into a log book," 1823, from logbook "daily record of a ship's speed, progress, etc." (1679), which is so called because wooden floats were used to measure a ship's speed. To log in in the computing sense is attested from 1963.

Well,yes, the Dutch word "log" means heavy and slow but to suppose logy might come from Dutch is not logic. We use the word log in most references just like the English word, exept for in the adjective form, where we do not add the 'y '.

BranShea #180357 11/17/08 11:47 AM
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803
He did say "perhaps." AHD agrees with him, adding that it may be a variant of loggy. The y would have been added in English, so its lack in the Dutch is no argument against this proposed etymology

Faldage #180358 11/17/08 01:55 PM
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542
I like the way the OED (Online Etymology Dictionary!) simplifies things [NB: not a recommendation]:
"dull and heavy," 1848, Amer.Eng., perhaps from Du. log "heavy, dull."

W3 adds, 'akin to Middle Low German luggich lazy, sleepy'

-joe (Monday morning, logy to the max) friday

tsuwm #180359 11/17/08 02:07 PM
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,295
Carpal Tunnel
OP Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,295
Yeh,yeh, but I can't help associating it with "sleeping like a log".
In the middle ages English and Dutch were so closely related and specially in the language coming from sailing, fishing ,boats and such. Well it's perhaps and sure we're nothing like the lighthearted Italians. Right: Heavy and dull, so be it.
Thanks Anu laugh

btw. I think I remember that the Dutch word "dul " in those days meant mad.
The Breughel painting: "De Dulle Griet" means she is mad; is translated: Mad Meg.

Mad Meg

She's the larger figure in the center: you can enlarge details.

How firm are phonological grounds?

Last edited by BranShea; 11/17/08 02:46 PM.
BranShea #180364 11/17/08 05:21 PM
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 6
B
stranger
Offline
stranger
B
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 6
Logy's AT4T

A THOUGHT FOR TODAY:
I don't know if God exists, but it would be better for His
reputation if he didn't. -Jules Renard, writer (1864-1910)

I'm always a little surprised at these less-than-subtle digs at religion.

It is possible to love words, be a respectable thinker, and be religious. There are plenty of other groups to pick on: Southerners, Northerner, Mid-Westerners, Westerners, Easterners, and, of course, Californians. :-) Well, Canadians, too. Then there's the flawed Europeans. And, politicians, absolutely.

BobS

BobVVore #180368 11/17/08 06:15 PM
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,295
Carpal Tunnel
OP Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,295
Originally Posted By: BobVVore
It is possible to love words, be a respectable thinker, and be religious. BobS
Of course.

But did we not get the same Thought for Today today?

"A THOUGHT FOR TODAY:
Whenever two people meet, there are really six people present. There is each man as he sees himself, each man as the other person sees him, and each man as he really is. -William James, psychologist and philosopher (1842-1910)"


BranShea #180376 11/18/08 12:47 AM
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,067
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,067
Originally Posted By: BranShea
Originally Posted By: BobVVore
It is possible to love words, be a respectable thinker, and be religious. BobS
Of course.

But did we not get the same Thought for Today today?

"A THOUGHT FOR TODAY:
Whenever two people meet, there are really six people present. There is each man as he sees himself, each man as the other person sees him, and each man as he really is. -William James, psychologist and philosopher (1842-1910)"

This is not unrelated to the previous poster's question, since it is only true if God exists. Think about it.

The Pook #180388 11/18/08 12:11 PM
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 13,803
Originally Posted By: The Pook

This is not unrelated to the previous poster's question, since it is only true if God exists. Think about it.


I would say this was a case of petitio principii but that would be edging too close to discussing religion, a taboo subject on this board.

Faldage #180391 11/18/08 12:38 PM
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,067
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,067
I understand the need to protect the forums from degenerating into endless arguments about religions and politics, etc, and agree with the idea of generally steering clear of overt promotion of religious positions. We are here primarily to discuss words.

However, I would argue that it's not possible to have an absolute ban on ever discussing anything religious since that would cut out discussion of a large part of the English language (and other languages living and dead that we also talk about). Many words and their etymologies are intrinsically religious, or occur in a philosophical setting that may legitimately involve talking about historical beliefs, etc. Religious talk in context should be allowed, in my opinion. Same goes for politics. You can't talk about the language of classic pieces of literature like the Gettysburg Address, or the Declaration of Independence, for example, without mentioning the religion and politics expressed in those documents. But it becomes obvious when a discussion has moved on to become merely a stoush between Republicans and Democrats or Atheists and Theists. It's just a matter of using common sense and tact.

The Pook #180396 11/18/08 02:11 PM
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542
Carpal Tunnel
Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 10,542
>It's just a matter of using common sense and tact

both of which *have gone south here (you should pardon the expression) from time to time in the past. thus we remain ever-vigilant.

-joe (but not vigilantes) friday

Page 1 of 2 1 2

Moderated by  Jackie 

Link Copied to Clipboard
Forum Statistics
Forums16
Topics13,913
Posts229,317
Members9,182
Most Online3,341
Dec 9th, 2011
Newest Members
Ineffable, ddrinnan, TRIALNERRA, befuddledmind, KILL_YOUR_SUV
9,182 Registered Users
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 596 guests, and 1 robot.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Top Posters(30 Days)
Top Posters
wwh 13,858
Faldage 13,803
Jackie 11,613
tsuwm 10,542
wofahulicodoc 10,534
LukeJavan8 9,916
AnnaStrophic 6,511
Wordwind 6,296
of troy 5,400
Disclaimer: Wordsmith.org is not responsible for views expressed on this site. Use of this forum is at your own risk and liability - you agree to hold Wordsmith.org and its associates harmless as a condition of using it.

Home | Today's Word | Yesterday's Word | Subscribe | FAQ | Archives | Search | Feedback
Wordsmith Talk | Wordsmith Chat

© 1994-2024 Wordsmith

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5