Interlingua English Dictionary revised in plain ascii format



Download 5.38 Mb.
Page1/79
Date29.01.2017
Size5.38 Mb.
#12606
  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   79
Interlingua English Dictionary
revised in plain ascii format
27471
Last changed 12/14/2015.
This dictionary contains revisions of some forms in the original. The basis for these revisions is the methodology described in several sources, but principally in the Introduction to the Interlingua-English Dictionary, published in 1951, but also the General Report of IALA in 1945. Behind them, written earlier, is also the manuscript by E. Clark Stillman and Alexander Gode in 1943, Interlinguistic Standardization, Vol. I, which initially laid out the methods to be used to extract and standardize vocabulary from the major source languages among the European languages influenced heavily by Latin and its descendents. Stanley Mulaik's Interlingua Grammar and Method and his Ha Le IED Errores? also lay out these methods in some detail, and the reader is directed to all these sources to understand the reasoning behind these revisions.

Briefly, the fundamental principle was that solutions had to be objectively based on linguistic evidence in the source languages. There was little room for subjective preferences, which could apply only when no objective solution was possible or there were more than one possible solution. Even then, there were supplementary techniques that provided guidance for reducing subjectivity of solutions.

But in general, the basic principles of Interlingua for extracting and standardizing words objectively in the international vocabulary concern the eligibility of words to enter the international vocabulary and the use of the prototypes to standardize their form. Eligibility required showing similar variants with the same meanings in at least three of the source languages, English, French, Italian, and Spanish/Portuguese (treated as a single language) with German and Russian as supplementary languages to be searched in the event three could not be found in the original four source languages. Mulaik, only in the case of grammatical particles, allows searches of Catalan/Occitan and Romanian for additional variants. The prototype was the nearest (historically) common, theoretical or documented form from which all the variants in the source languages deviated as a result of linguistic phonemic and phonetic evolution in ways characteristic of their languages, with the proviso that the resultant form must never be conditioned by a characteristic restricted to a single variant, as long as eliminating that variant did not reduce the number of variants contributing to less than three.

For example, consider the variants E chase, catch, hunt F. chasser, I cacciare, S cazar, P caçar.

Originally the IED listed ‘chassar’. But this is not the nearest historical or documented prototype common to all the variants and is an error. Although we can trace the etymology of these words back to Latin ‘capere’, meaning to grasp or seize, we note that derived from this was the frequentative verb in Latin ‘captare’ based on the irregular past participle stem, which meant to catch or seize frequently. Then in Vulgar Latin there was the form ‘*captiare’ meaning to chase, hunt, seize. This form further evolved by the assimilation of -p- to the following -t-, ‘*catiare’, which, according to “Chamber’s English Etymology,” was written as ‘*caciare’, and found in Medieval Latin texts. It is from this form that Norman French ‘cachier’, Old French ‘chacier’, Italian cacciare, and Spanish cazar and Portuguese caçar are derived. But then English ‘chase’ and French ‘chasser’ is derived from Old French ‘chacier’. But English ‘catch’ comes from Old North French ‘cachier’ and ‘cacher’, derived from Medieval Latin ‘*caciare’ before Old French changed Latin ‘ca-’ to ‘cha-’ in the 11th Century. So, the nearest prototype common to all the variants is caciare which is standardized in Interlingua as ‘caciar’.

In the case when there are not three variants with a common prototype, there are supplementary techniques which still yield semi-objective solutions: Usually a best solution could be found from an examination of the forms in variants in the source languages to find one that was based already on international forms. For example, given the prepositions E until , F jusqu'a, I fino a, S hasta, P até C fins a, O fins a, there are not three variants to establish an eligible solution. However, Italian ‘fino a’ and ‘fins a’ in the group of Catalan and Occitan are based on ‘fin’ which means ‘end’, and ‘a’ which means at: ‘end at’. ‘fin’ and ‘a’ have already been established in the international vocabulary. So, we can use ‘fin a’ to mean ‘until’. This uses a metaphor that action through time involves movement along a path in space and one can designate when the action (movement) ends by designating a point on the path: “Do this until next Friday = Do this end at next Friday.” French ‘jusqu’a’ has no obvious meaning backed by already ‘international forms.’ Latin ‘usque’ is not international.

The author of the revisions is Stanley Mulaik who, after careful linguistic study of each revised entry made the corrections of certain forms in the original to make the dictionary more consistent with the methodology described in the Introduction of the Interlingua-English Dictionary and in his Interlingua Grammar and Method. The changes involved a number of particles and isolated words and affixes throughout the dictionary.

The original dictionary contained grammatical particles for use with interlingua from a complete list of Latin particles, very similar to particles of Latin sine Flexione of Guiseppi Peano, chosen in 1943 by E. Clark Stillman and Alexander Gode when a search of the three Romance source languages, French, Italian and Spanish/Portuguese failed to yield enough particles (only 73) using the eligibility rule that for a particle three variants among the source languages was required. Unfortunately this was a failed methodology since it did not take into account that if by historical accident a variant of a particle in one modern source language differed in not having the same prototype common to variants from the other romance languages, no solution was eligible. English, because of its Germanic particles, had little to contribute in providing solutions for absent variants for particles. Neither did German and Russian. That left only the original three major Romance languages to search. More source languages with common ancestors of the particles with the major Romance languages was needed. That meant that only minor Romance languages besides the major Romance languages could potentially share common ancestors of a particle with at least one variant in the major Romance languages and possibly provide a solution.

In this case Mulaik chose Catalan/Occitan (as a group, like Spanish/Portuguese) and Romanian as supplementary source languages to search when the three major romance languages did not yield three variants for a particle with a common prototype ancestor. Note: this procedure only applied to the case of grammatical particles and not the general vocabulary. We do not search the minor Romance languages for terms in the general vocabulary, because any international words derivable from the Catalan or Occitan vocabulary in the general vocabulary are already represented in 99% of the cases of three variants of the major Romance languages. Using these minor romance languages for grammatical particles was justified because they would more likely have particles with a common ancestor with at least one of the variants in the original three romance languages.

This practice of searching supplementary languages had precedence in the use by IALA of German and Russian as supplementary languages when the original four source languages did not yield three variants with a common prototype ancestor for words in the general vocabulary. In the case of particles, at least one variant particle of the major romance languages (French, Italian, Spanish/Portugese) would have to have a prototype in common with particles in Catalan/Occitan (very similar languages) and Romanian, meaning the center of gravity of the particles would still be within the major romance languages. Perhaps different choices for minor romance languages to search was possible, but these are the next most important romance languages after the three major romance languages. Most of the romance languages point back to a common ancestor in spoken everyday popular Latin for most of their particles, which makes possible the use of the prototype principle to find objective solutions. Prototypes may be thought of as the common causes of the similarity among variant forms in the different source languages.

Originally there were also particles in the IED that were taken from other constructed auxiliary languages to make the dictionary's international vocabulary more useful to partisans of those languages. These were entered in brackets [ ]. These were not intended originally for use in Interlingua. Only the list of Latin particles was to be used. Gode who guided the work of the Interlingua-English Dictionary thought, at the last minute before sending the manuscript to the printer, that adherents to other artificial and natural auxiliary languages might wish to use the Dictionary to modify their vocabularies on natural, international lines and would like to see how some of their familiar grammatical particles were listed as "...neither incompatible with its principles nor a necessary product of them." No effort was made at the time to check to see if particles in [ ] represented prototypes satisfying the rules of eligibility and standardization of form used with the rest of the vocabulary. Some of these indeed are prototypes, but that determination has come only since then, principally by Mulaik's research (See Mulaik, S. A. 2012 Interlingua Grammar and Method Second Edition, Marietta, GA: Published by the author with Create Space, 375 pages, available from Amazon.com). There is also a discussion of the acceptable particles in [ ] in Mulaik's Ha le IED Errores? . Many other particles in [ ], however, are still not bona fide particles according to the methodology of interlingua, and words in this dictionary still in [ ] are excluded from use by Mulaik in his Interlingua Grammar and Method, and are retained only because they were historically in the original dictionary and have not been shown to be prototypes and thus have not had the [ ] removed.

There are also a few errors found throughout the IED in entries that did not satisfy either eligibility or prototype rules. Forms which at one time were in the original vocabulary of the IED but at this time are determined to be inconsistent with the methodology in the rules of eligibility (entry must have at least three variants or be determined by a supplementary technique) and the rule of standardization of form by the prototype (form from which the variants deviate in systematic ways characteristic of their languages), are indicated by †.

There has been no effort, however, to rigorously search the entire IED for other errors. They come to our attention when someone raises questions about a particular word and that leads to a new analysis of the linguistic evidence supporting the word. Some are vindicated, others are shown to be errors. Gode admitted the possibility of errors due to subjective bias or improper evidence.

The changes generally are the following:

The suffix -isar of French origin is replaced by the prototype '-izar' to make it accord with the original latin form -izare derived from the Greek -izein and also accord with American/British English -ize, Spanish -izar, Italian -izzare .

Inclusion of new forms for the demonstrative adjectives and pronouns: *'aquelle' {adj}; *'aquelle', *'aquella', e *'aquello' {pron}. A corresponding variant of 'iste' is *aqueste with analogous variants for the demonstrative pronouns. But 'iste' is not replaced.

Inclusion of a new prototypic form for the adverb of near place corresponding to 'here': *aqui. From Esp./Ptg. 'aqui', Catalan/Occitan 'aqui', Romanian 'aici’, Italian 'qui'. The forms in the respective languages for the adverb denoting the proximate location of the speaker show parallels with the demonstrative adjectives and pronouns.

Other new particles with three variants in the romance languages or established by supplementary techniques are indicated by *.

The suffix '-iera' in the IED, similar to forms in Occidental, used to designate things in a category of that which contains, covers, holds, or protects, or place that yields or produces , is artificial. For examples, sucre (sugar), †sucriera (sugar bowl); calde (warm, hot) †caldiera (kettle boiler). Similarly the suffix -iero in the IED used with names of fruits and nuts, etc. to designate the trees, bushes, plants that bear or produce them, is artificial. For example, ceresia (cherry), †ceresiero (cherry tree); coton (cotton), †cotoniero (cotton plant).

In all cases the source languages use their respective feminine or masculine forms of the suffix indicating agency, which are -era (feminine) and -ero (masculine) in Interlingua. French has -ier, iére, -er, -ére. Spanish -ero and -era. Portuguese has -eiro and -eira. Italian has -aio and -aia , and -ière and -ièra. No such distinct categories with corresponding distinct suffixes exist in the source languages. It is replaced here by the prototype '-era' or '-ero' (depending on which gender form predominates in the variants), which indicates agent, person or thing, that does < >, yields < > , produces etc. In some cases, e.g. sucriera has been changed here to sucrero because in the source languages, for example French sucrier, Spanish azucarero, Portuguese açucareiro, Italian zuccheriera the suffix is predominantly masculine with F -ier , S -ero, P -eiro, = Ila -ero. Similarly coton, cotonero. And calde, caldera.

This has the effect of expanding the use of -ero and -era beyond just persons who work with or do <…>, because these corresponding suffixes of agency apply also to animals, plants, substances and things in the source languages.

Other changes are 'caciar' for '†chassar', 'cacia' for '†chassa', '†caciator' for 'chassator'. The old forms (indicated by †) seem to have been borrowed from Occidental and French. The new forms are indicated by *.

‘mais’ (Indian) corn, maize becomes ‘maiz’ because English ‘maize’, Sp. ‘maiz’ (the historical prototype), Fr. mais, It. mais, G. mais. Two variants with -z- means these cannot be excluded from forming the prototype, which historically is Spanish ‘maiz’.

Following is a list of changed particles. Some are new and previously overlooked, and some are rescued from the status of being in [ ]. E = English, F = French, I = Italian, S = Spanish, P = Portuguese, C = Catalan, O = Occidental, R = Romanian L = Latin, VL = Vulgar Latin, OF = Old French, LL = late Latin. '>' and '<' mean 'derived from', with the pointer toward the derived form.

*al- = †ali-

*alcun = adj. some < L 'alicun', F. 'aucun', It. 'alcuno', Sp. algún, P. algum

*alque = †alique pron. something

*antie advers. conj. rather. From Latin 'ante' > Late or Vul. Latin 'antiis/antius' (rather = on the contrary) > I 'anzi', S 'antes', C 'ans'

*aquelle = dem. remote, adj. that = (†ille) < VL 'accu+ille' fusion of ('atque + eccu') + 'ille', or 'ac + quelle < ac + (ec)cu + ille. Sp. aquel, aquella, Pt. aquele Cat. aquell, aquella Oc. aquel, aquella R. acel, acea

*aqueste = iste = dem. adj. proximate ('iste' is preferred because antique Spanish

*aqueste was replaced by este in Spanish in the 1600's.) Cat./Occ. aquest, aquesta, It. questo, questa, Rom acest (Romanian /kw/ before -e- as in -qu- before -e-/-i- mutated to /tch/, written as -c-. (L. quaerere > Rom. 'cere').

*aqui = †hic (Lat.) here F. ici < L. (e)cce +hic; < VL. (a)ccu(m)+hic Sp. aqui, It. qui, C. aquí, O. aqui

*cima {n}. top, topmost, summit, termination. F cime, I cima S cima P cima C cim

*de retro adv. < L. retro Eng. behind, back, at rear; ago F. derrière I. dietro, Sp. detrás, P. atrás, Cat. darrere

†ex < Lat. ex E. out of, from see 'de,' 'desde,' and 'foras'

*desde prep, adv. < Vul. Lat. 'de + ex + de' E from, from out of; since . F. dès < Lat 'de ex', It. a partire da/dopo da, da allora; Sp./Pt. desde, Cat. 'des de; dès, R. din

*fin a (prep) fin que (conj) < Lat. 'fine' abl. 'de finis' ; E until / until that ('end at') I 'fino a', 'fino che'; F jusqu'a; S hasta; P até, C/O fins a, fins que Rom. 'pîna la'

Based on supplementary technique since source languages do not have a common form for three variants. Picked Italian 'fino a' because it means 'end at' and 'until' is based on a metaphor of ongoing action as something moving along a path until it ends at some point, which is behind the Italian, Catlan/Occitan and Romanian forms. English 'until' is Germanic, with 'un- meaning up to and 'til' also 'up to'. This has the same metaphor. 'fin' and 'a' are already in the international vocabulary.

*il face (multe tempore) loc. adv. < Lat. facere E. ago F. il y a, dans le passé; I fa; S hace

*dentro, de intro prep/adv < Vulg. Lat. de intro/de intus, E. within F dans < VL 'de intus', I dentro, S/P dentro C. dins, dins de, dintre Occ. dins

*josu adv < VL josu < L deorsum; E. down; OF jus; I guise; OS yuso; OP juso; O jos; Rom. jos

*la adv < Lat. illac E there; F là; I là; Sp. allá; P lá; C allà; Occ. lai

*longitan < VL longitanus < L longus E. far off, distant, very far, F lointain; I lontano; S lejano; P multo long; C luny; O luènh. Replaces †[lontan] because it properly belongs in the derivational family of 'longe'.

mais conj < VLat *magis (= plus) > F mais; I ma; S mas; P mas (Already listed as bona fide prototype in the IED).

*medesme adj, adv, pn is a proper prototype and synonym of 'mesme'. I use 'mesme' because of 'same' < cognate con Lat. similis via protoindoeuropean and Germanic '*sama'. Based on VL metipsimu(s) E same, myself, yourself, himself, herself, etc.; F 'même < OF medisme, medesme < very Late VL metessim < VL metipsimu(s); It. medesimo, S. mismo, P. mesmo, Cat. mateix, Occ. mateis. Comment: IALA's solution of 'mesme' treated the -d- of It. 'medesimo' as unique to Italian in the group of FI(S/P) (Even so there were still only three language (groups) and excluding the unique -d- was not proper even then. With only three variants the prototype is whatever is common to the three variants, and that can include the more antique form in one. You exclude characters only in cases where there are four or more variants and the character found in one only is discarded. As I say, this is one exception to my following the rule because 'medesme' looks to differ more from English 'same' than does 'mesme'. But others might chose to follow the rule.)

*maiz n < S maiz < Caribbean native language maiz = maize, corn E maize, corn; F mais; I mais S maiz, Pt. milho. Rus. mais (S 'maiz' and Eng. ‘maize’ < S ‘maiz’) two variants establishes this as the prototype.

*mentre, mentre que, conj. < VL dum interim E. while F. tandis que, It. mentre; Sp. mientras, mientras que; Cat/Occ. 'mentre' Rom. între temp

*necun adj < VL necun(u) < Lat. nec unu E not any, none; F (ne) aucun, Old French negun; S ningún; P nenhum; I (old Venetian) negún, nessuno; C ningú; O; negun. Synonym of 'non alcun'

*necuno pron < L nec unu(m) E no one; F. personne; I nessuno; S ninguno; P ninguém; C ningú; O negun

*pois adv/conj < VL *po(ste)is or po(st)i(us) < CL post or post; E 'since that', because, 'since, for F puis; I poi; S pues; P poise = 'since,' 'therefore'; C puix - 'since because; O pois; R poi

*pois que conj < VL *po(ste)is or po(st)i(u)s < CL post or post; E 'since that' because, since, for; F puisque; I poiché, poi che; S pues que; P poise que, depose que; C puix que; O poise que

*pot'esser L forsan E maybe, perhaps; F peut-être; I foresee; S tal vex, P talvez, C potser, R poate. By a supplementary technique, based on the French 'peut-être' and Catalan 'potser', with English 'maybe' a calque translation of 'pote esser'

*quantcunque < adj/adv/conj < quant(e) + -cunque / E however much/many; I quantunque

*subto, †subtus < L subtu(s) E below, beneath, underneath; F en dessous, en bas; I sotto, giuso S †so abajo; P sob, abaixo; C sota, dessota; O dejós, dessota; R dedesubt, jos

*suso adv < L sursum, sussum; E above, upward, up; F sus,dessus, en haut; I su †suso S †suso, acima, para cima; C dalt, †dessús, damunt; O sus; R sus

†tamben adv < VL tan bene < L tantu(s) bene E also, as well; F aussi bien, aussi I †tambéne, anche; S también; P também, C també; O tanben

*ubique adv < L ubique; E everywhere, anywhere; F partout; I in ogni luogo, dappertutto; S dondequiera que; P não importa onde; C a tot arreu; O pertot. By supplementary technique,using a Latin word when no international form is found. You can also say 'in tote partes'.

===========================================================

The Interlingua - English Dictionary (REV2):

a = {prep} 1. to (a point in space or time, a goal, etc.); 2. at (a point in space or time, a stage of development, etc.); `a (+inf)' to; {also:} for (+gerund); `sala a attender' waiting room {Hence:} [apena] etc.

[a-] = {prefixo verbal} [used with verbs and, in combination with verbal suffixes, with nouns and adjectives] to, toward, into (expressing motion to, change into, increase of intensity, etc.) {Hence:} abatter etc.; abassar etc.

a- = {prefixo} [`an-' before `-h-' and vowels; used with nouns and adjectives] a-, an- (= not ...; without, lacking ...) {Hence:} agnostic etc.; amnesia etc.; analphabete etc.; anarchia etc.; anesthesia etc.; anesthetic etc.; anhydre etc.; athee etc.

Aachen [G] = {npr} Aachen, Aix-la-Chapelle

ab = {prep} since, from

abandonamento = {n} abandonment

abandonar = {v} to abandon; `abandonar se a' to indulge in

abandono = {n} I. abandonment (1. action of abandoning; 2. state of being abandoned); II. abandon {Hence:} abandonar-abandonamento

abassamento = {n} lowering; {also:} abasement; `abassamento de un equation' [Math.] reduction of an equation

abassar = {v} to lower; {also:} to abase; `abassar un perpendicular' [Geom.] to drop a perpendicular

abatter = {v} to knock or cast down {Hence:} abattimento; abattitor; abattitorio; abattite

abattimento = {n} despondency, dejection

abattite = 1 {pp} of `abatter'; 2. {adj} downcast, dejected

abattitor = {n} one who knocks down; {also:} feller, wood-cutter, slaughterer, etc.

abattitorio = {n} slaughterhouse, abattoir

abbate = {n} abbot {Hence:} abbatessa; abbatia-abbatial

abbatessa = {n} abbess

abbatia (-ía) = {n} 1. abbacy; 2. abbey

abbatial = {adj} abbatial

abbordabile = {adj} approachable, accessible

abbordage (-aje) = {n} [Naut.] (act of) boarding (a ship)

abbordar = {v} 1. to land (= to go ashore from a ship or boat); 2. [Navy] to board (= to come alongside in order to attack); 3. to accost, address {Hence:} abbordo; abbordage; abbordabile

abbordo = {n} 1. [Naut.] (act of) landing; 2. [Navy] (act of) boarding (a ship)

abbreviamento = {n} abridgement, abbreviation

abbreviar = {v} to abridge, abbreviate {Hence:} abbreviamento; abbreviation; abbreviative; abbreviator; abbreviatura

abbreviation = {n} abbreviation, abridgment

abbreviative = {adj} abridging, abbreviatory

abbreviator = {n} 1. abridger, abbreviator; 2. [R.C.Ch.] abbreviator

abbreviatura = {n} abbreviation (= shortened form of a word)

abdicar = {v} to abdicate {Hence:} abdication; abdicative

abdication = {n} abdication

abdicative = {adj} abdicative

abdominal = {adj} abdominal

abdomine = {n} abdomen {Hence:} abdominal

abducer [-duc-/-duct-] = {v} to lead away, abduce; 2. [Physiol.] to abduct {Hence:} abduction; abductor

abduct- = {see} `abducer'


Download 5.38 Mb.

Share with your friends:
  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   ...   79




The database is protected by copyright ©ininet.org 2022
send message

    Main page