Language desk
< January 7	<< Dec \| January \| Feb >>	January 9 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Language Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

January 8

Is "renowned" derived from a verb?

Greetings.

I just made this edit, with the edit summary: "renown" is a noun; what we need here is a verbal adjective, "renowned".

Then I got to wondering. If "renowned" is verbal, there must be a verb that relates to it. It sounds like it's the past participle of "to renown", except I've never heard of anyone "renowning" something/body. I checked renowned in wiktionary and my own trusty dictionary, and they just say it's an adjective, with no mention of any related verb.

I'm guessing the form "renowned" came into existence when there was a verb, but that verb vanished so long ago that it's not even recorded as ancient or obsolete. Am I on the right track here? if not, how do we explain the the –ed ending? Are there any other adjectives in the English language that end in –ed but are not derived from verbs?

PS. After I wrote the above, I checked the archives and found this thread, where I referred to "famed doctors". So there's another example of an adjective with an –ed ending but without a corresponding verb. "Reputed" would be another, unless one can repute something. Now I'm guessing there's probably a whole class of such words.

Any clues about the above, O renowned colleagues? -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 07:45, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, yes, it's derived from a verb, meaning "to make famous". But the loop seems to be the verb "renown" to "renowned" ("famous") and then back to the noun "renown". Fun one. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 08:25, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

From Etymonline: c.1300, from Anglo-Fr. renoun, O.Fr. renon, from renomer "make famous," from re- "repeatedly" (see re-) + nomer "to name," from L. nominare "to name." The Middle English verb renown has been assimilated to the noun via renowned "famous, celebrated" (late 14c.). So it seems like it was re-nouned. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 08:34, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Such wit re-verberates loud and long in the corridors of my so-called mind. :) -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 09:06, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

JackofOz -- It's not really true that an "-ed" suffixed form comes from a verb. "Double-barreled" doesn't come from a verb "to barrel", "Bow-legged" doesn't come from a verb "to leg", "Long-lived" originally had a completely different pronunciation from the verb form "lived", etc. AnonMoos (talk) 18:21, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Right, thanks. So, is it possible to come up with a full list of such adjectives? That is, ones that end in -ed but are not derived from or related to a verb in current use. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 19:56, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Here's one: hallowed ("on hallowed ground"; we never use the verb "hallow" except in special contexts like "hallowed be Thy name"). -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 22:10, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Or when quoting LIncoln's Gettysburg Address, "...we cannot hallow this ground..." ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:41, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hallow is indeed a verb. I use it in the imperative when answering the phone. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 22:21, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

'Besotted' might be a candidate. I don't think you can besot someone, though you can be besotted with someone. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 22:31, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

'Learned' is another interesting one, with different pronunciation from the simple past tense of 'learn', having 'my learnED friend' (educated person I know) differing in meaning from a hypothetical 'my learned friend' (a friend I learned about). KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 22:44, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe that's enough examples, but I also thought of "left-handed" and "right-handed", which appear to have nothing to do with the verb "hand". 86.171.42.77 (talk) 03:33, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

JackofOz -- It's somewhat productive (i.e. new ones can be coined in some circumstances), so I don't think a fixed list is possible. Someone who had a beard dyed fuchsia could be "fuschia-bearded", etc. etc. Here's one discussion: http://web.tiscali.it/njross/dubarrelart.htm -- AnonMoos (talk) 01:33, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

While that discussion is quite entertaining, AnonMoos, the source doesn't talk about the origin of the -ed suffix in phrases like four-legged animal that are outside past-tense verbal constructions. Do you of any source which discusses its origin? μηδείς (talk) 05:23, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In volume 6 of his classic 7-volume grammar of English, Otto Jespersen gives some old examples, such as Old English sūr-ēagede "sour-eyed", Chaucer's long y-herd "long-haired" etc. However, I'm not aware of any basic linguistic explanation for such pseudo-verbing. AnonMoos (talk) 18:20, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It would seem that noun - ed construction would be derived from the verbs "to be" or "to have": legged (to have legs, or to be one with legs) barreled (to have barrels, or to be a thing with barrels); lived (to have life, or to be alive); bearded (to have a beard, or to be one with a beard); learned (to have learning, or to be one with learning), etc. (In some cases, "to make" also)Alanscottwalker (talk) 12:55, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Are these not adjectives, and do you have a source for this theory, Alan? -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 18:18, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

They become adjectives. Like renowned comes from 'to make known/famous'. Known like these other (root) words can be a noun: it is known. Are the definitions I mentioned in dispute? (A long-legged man is a man with long legs; a short-lived rumor is a rumor with a short life, etc.) - Alanscottwalker (talk) 19:04, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What I mean is: I fully understand the logical connection between having a beard and being described as a bearded person. It's the specific ending "-ed" that I'm curious about. Why "-ed" and not "-en" or anything else? When I was first thinking aloud about this issue above, I assumed the -ed came from a verb, because that's how the past tense of most verbs is formed. But I was disabused of that idea by AnonMoos, who reminded me there's no such verb as "to bow-leg", but we still have the word "bow-legged". He also says he's not aware of any basic linguistic explanation for such pseudo-verbing. You, however, seem to have a new theory that involves the verbs "to be" and "to have". Can you tell me where you got this theory from, and how does knowing this (assuming it's true) explain why we make these adjectives using the -ed suffix, specifically? -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 20:59, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't announcing a theory, so much as making an observation about all the examples (e.g. hallowed - to be or to make holy). They all seem to take a noun root and add ed and the meaning is invariably involving the verbs that mean 'to have' the quality of that noun. So, perhaps "ed" as the suffix that means something has happened (it has become) was the way to do that that made sense. Alanscottwalker (talk) 21:40, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Request for translation of Latin epitaph

I'm working on an article about a French village and would like to mention a marble slab that was found in the church. The slab has a Latin inscription along three of the sides – the fourth side is missing. The text is in Gothic lettering and is not easy to read. I have two sources that give the text. The first gives:

Hec est sepultura mag[ist]ri militis, utriusq[ue] juris professoris, domini Jordani Bricii, domini castrorum Velaucii et Castrinovi-Rubri, qui fuit judex major Provincie, et fecit edifica...

From here. The book can be viewed in the US but I'm in London and have only "Snippet" view (unless I use a proxy server). The second source gives:

HAEC EST SEPULTURA MAG[IST]RI NOBILIS UTRIUSQUE JURIS PROFESSORIS DOMINI JORDANI BRICII, DOMINI CASTRORUM VELAUCII ET CASTRI NOVI RUBEI QUI FUIT JUDEX MAJOR PROVINCIE...

The text is given in note 2 at the bottom of the page here.

The text is about Jordanus Bricius. Velaux and Châteauneuf-le-Rouge are communes near Aix. JUDEX MAJOR is some form of senior judge (juge-mage in French).

Note that the 5th word in the 1st text is militis while the 2nd text has NOBILIS. The text appears to be damaged at this point. How should I translate the epitaph? Thanks Aa77zz (talk) 18:09, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"This is the tomb of the noble master (and) one of the professors of the law, Lord Jordanus Bricius, Lord of the castles of Velaux and Châteauneuf-le-Rouge, who was chief judge of Provence."

(That's the second version. For the first, substitute 'master soldier' for 'noble master', and add "and made buildings..." to the end.) If you have an image of the text, I'd be happy to try and work out which transcription is the better. Or is the transcription a copy of the now-missing side? AlexTiefling (talk) 18:31, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

UTRIUSQUE JURIS refers to secular (Roman) and canon law. Iblardi (talk) 18:36, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, rather than "one of the professors of the law", it's "professor of both laws [viz., canon and civil law]". Deor (talk) 18:41, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) Aha. Thank you. So "professor of both canon and secular law", rather than "(and) one of the professors of the law"? AlexTiefling (talk) 18:43, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Deor's suggestion is good. Iblardi (talk) 18:47, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Page 78 of the first source here has a picture - which I intend to eventually upload. Aa77zz (talk) 18:45, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid Google Books' preview of that book is insufficient for me to be able to see the image at all. Sorry. AlexTiefling (talk) 18:48, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

According to this biographical dictionary Jourdain Brice had a booklet printed in 1433, well before Gutenberg invented the printing press. --Pp.paul.4 (talk) 00:59, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for your help, it now makes sense. I hadn't realized that there were two types of law but I can see here that he was "docteur en l'un et l'autre droit". Aa77zz (talk) 15:54, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pronunciation of "Lefebvre"

I'm giving a presentation soon and am wondering how the surname of French philosopher Henri Lefebvre should be pronounced – "luh-FEV"? — SMUconlaw (talk) 21:57, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pretty much. The '-re' (with a schwa sound) reappears depending on the following syllable (so the English possessive of the name, Lefebvre's, has a sort of 'ruhz' sound at the end). The 'b' never reappears. The surname of Louis James Alfred Lefébure-Wély, which is surely closely etymologically related, is pronounced luh-FAY-byoor-VAY-li. Language is weird. Does anyone know about the origin of these names? AlexTiefling (talk) 22:02, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) The Lefèvre article on the French Wikipedia gives [løfɛvr] for all variations of the name, including 'Lefèbvre'. - Lindert (talk) 22:08, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is one of the trickiest names for English speakers who don't know any French to pronounce, especially ironic since the name means "Smith". I worked with guy named Lefebvre once, and he pronounced it "luh-FAVE", though IIRC, baseball player Jim Lefebvre pronounced it "luh-FEE-vur" while fellow player Joe Lefebvre pronounced it "luh-FAY". The French pronounciation given my Lindert is probably the best for any native French speaker, with the caveat that many dialects of french drop final "r" sounds, or clip them very short (as in 4 = quatre, [kɑt] and [kɑtr] are both heard). --Jayron32 22:17, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and to answer Alex's question on the origin of the name, it means "Smith", and I'm pretty sure it comes from the same root that gives us "ferrum" latin for iron. I think it comes from an archaic French word, as the modern French word for smith is forgeron. The French Wikipedia article cited above by Lindert confirms that it is an archaic word meaning just that. --Jayron32 22:23, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The name derives from faber, "craftsman". This is unrelated to ferrum, which is probably a loanword, imported from the Near East along with the metal itself (according to Walde-Hofmann, Lateinisches Etymologisches Wörterbuch). Iblardi (talk) 22:36, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I stand corrected. Thanks for that. --Jayron32 22:39, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The "b" was introduced solely to reference Latin etymology, and so was useless and confusing with respect to French pronunciation from the start. The fact that "v" and "u" were not clearly distinguished as separate letters until ca. the late eighteenth century caused some people to pronounce it "Lefébure" (see Lefébure)... AnonMoos (talk) 01:19, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, everyone! Looking particularly at Jayron32's comments, I suppose that's why John Boehner is pronounced "BAY-nər"? It looks like the surname was originally German ("Böhner"?) which would make the pronunciation more like "BUR-nər". — SMUconlaw (talk) 03:18, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

German-origin words in the USA at least tend to be pronounced that way when they include oe, otherwise known as ö. As with Wayne Newton's signature song "donk-uh shayn". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:40, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

But then, I've never heard an American refer to Arnold Schoenberg as "Shayn-berg". Nor does anyone ever say "Ine-steen" for Einstein; they reserve the "steen" pronunciation for Leonard Bernstein. -- Jack of Oz ^[Talk] 06:24, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sometimes they'll give it the long-o, so a name like Koenig could be either "kay-nig" or "koe-nig". Hence the joke of referring to the Speaker of the House as "Boner". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 07:20, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to be reasonably common to render German-origin names with ö (oe) as /ɛ/ or /eɪ/, particularly in the US, though I haven't met it in the UK. I suspect that there is an influence from Yiddish, where words related to German words with "ö" are pronounced with /e/. --ColinFine (talk) 12:28, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A German friend of mine indicated once that the "stine"/"steen" difference was related to Yiddish ("-steen" being Yiddish and "-stine" being "normal" German. The "donk-uh shayn" pronunciation is also related to Yiddish. (See notes in Danke Schoen, as well as comparison to Bei Mir Bistu Shein). Note that it's not just Yiddish that leads to dialectical pronunciation issues. John Boehner's pronunciation probably isn't related to Yiddish, but possibly stems from the fact that he's from the Ohio area. (I can't find where his father's line is from, so I'm making a reasonable assumption there's also from the Ohio area.) That area of the US has a large number of "Pennsylvania Dutch", who speak a dialect of German different from standard German, which our article notes has an /øː/ → /eː/ (schön → schee) vowel shift. -- 205.175.124.30 (talk) 19:23, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

My sense of deja vu made me dig through archives: Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Archives/Language/2012_January_27#John_Boehner. Basically, the diphtongization of umlauts seems to be a feature of Texas German dialect. No such user (talk) 09:46, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Many French names besides LeFebvre are a mess for native-English speakers to pronounce. My last name has an e-accent-aigu in it natively in French, which signifies a vowel sound that simply does not exist in English. The result is that I have met people with my last name that pronounce it three different ways (none with the native vowel, of course, including my family), quite a feat for a name with only 4 letters. It's the same with the German "oe", which again represents a sound that doesn't exist in English, which is why people approximate it so many different ways. --Jayron32 06:31, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]