Word Facts

Before certain achievements in the fields of anthropology and archeology, were developed, linguists would study languages and draw conclusions about migration patterns and other history. To be clear, this happens today as well, but usually in tandem with genetic information and anthropology. Some outrageous claims, even for the time included the ideas that Germans settled Ethiopia, or that Norwegians settled in North America. The latter happens to be true, however, both of these were tested in the early 17th century based upon lists of "core vocabularies" (familial terms, numbers, natural features, etc.) and other more superficial relations, which were quickly disregarded by academics. The explanations they had will be discussed tomorrow. Check out the newest Word facts Video: https://youtu.be/2u5SP0tg6Fs , and give your support on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/wordfacts

In addition to ' SOS ' [1], there are plenty of words which are neither acronyms or initialisms, but are popularly though to be. Sometimes this happens from in folk etymologies, such as the fabled origins or ' posh ' [2], but some words can be misleading. 'Wifi' is neither an acronym nor initialism, but many people believe that it is from the phrase "wireless fidelity". In fact, it just comes from a shortening of 'wireless' and the 'fi' was added on from the pattern of 'hi-fi', but is meaningless. In fairness, 'hifi' in music is short for 'high fidelity', so in a roundabout way, the mistaken etymology of 'wifi' is not so far off. Check out the newest Word facts Video: https://youtu.be/2u5SP0tg6Fs , and give your support on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/wordfacts

Even though both 'chief and 'chef' come to English via French, French doesn't distinguish between the two quite the same way. As can be seen with the Anglicized pronunciation of CH in 'chief', that term has existed in English longer and has had more time to be assimilated, coming from Old French, while 'chef' is only two or so centuries old in English. 'Chef' however comes from "chef de la cuisine" ("head of the kitchen") and so is associated with food in English, but in French it is just synonymous with 'boss' or 'head', or, if you will, 'chief'. The term 'chief' may now have the sense in English of a tribal leader, but this is completely unrelated to any French intentions or origins. Check out the new video, out today: https://youtu.be/2u5SP0tg6Fs

Spelling is extremely influential to the way that people speak. This occasionally happens when words are loaned from language to another, and was especially true before audio-recordings were readily available. This is why the country Laos is often pronounced with an [s] at the end, even though neither the French colonists nor the locals ever did so, yet Kiribati—only called such since 1979—is known to be pronounced with an [s] at the end even though it is spelled with none. In both cases, the spelling is from non-English orthography being adopted directly, Laos from French which often has silent terminal letter, and Kiribati, which is from the native language whose alphabet has no S and instead uses TI. Check out the new video, out today:  https://youtu.be/2u5SP0tg6Fs

In general, people tend to be pretty good at following rules of grammar, with the exception of phrases. There are a variety of ways that English speakers opt for conventions over rules [1], but with such little morphology, there aren’t so many occasions to use incorrect verb-forms anyway. However, in the utterance “Aren’t I…?” the verb clearly does not agree with the subject; this is not the case for the statement “I am (not)”, or the affirmative question “Am I?”. This really is because people are quite used to contractions in this type of situation, but for some reason “amn’t” did not catch on outside of a few regional dialects, and moreover the typical contraction “I’m” is in the wrong order for here. It is thought that one of the many causes for “ain’t”—as there was more than one factor —was the elision of the older “amn’t”. Check out the new video, out today: https://youtu.be/2u5SP0tg6Fs

There are lots of uses for the '-er' suffix, including indicating agents or actions , but other times it is completely coincidental. There are a few cases however, which are a bit harder to discern. One such term is 'trouser', because while there is no word meant by 'trouse' today, there did used to be. Related to the rare word 'trews', which is a Scottish regimental pant, 'trousers' comes from the Scotts 'triubhas'. The '-r' then is clearly not to show agency of any kind, and is instead thought to have been added due to its relation to the word 'drawers'. Check out the newest Word facts Video: https://youtu.be/gXIq8o668Fw , and give your support on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/wordfacts

Some of the earliest linguistic observation was by missionaries, but some of the earliest intercontinental communication was by kidnappers. The likes of Columbus—who brought with him an Arabic interpreter—and Cortéz, when they first made contact in the Americas, would have had to use drawings and ad hoc gestures, but since it takes a long time to learn a language, especially one with no relation whatsoever, it would be a lengthy process to learn the language form anyone. However, for children, this process took slightly less time, and children would probably be less resistant in general, so all of these early explorers and conquerors tended to kidnap a local child who would soon act as an interpreter for the linguistic area. This was especially useful in Mesoamerica wherein one language could be spoken over a large region, and it is because of the success of these interpreters who could communicate with many tribes that the region was conquered so quickly and totally. Check out t...