Etymology of meanings. Brief etymological dictionary of planetary toponyms. At the origins of civilization

“Unnecessary knowledge” or two words about entropy

Why am I telling it for you? I want that it will be clear: there are no meaningless words or meaningless sounds in the world. Words didn’t fall from the sky. When the first sounds appeared, they already had some meaning, carried a semantic load. In other words, all the ancient phonemes were already morphemes in their own way. This semantic load has not disappeared – we just stopped noticing it. But even in those words that we borrow from other languages, when parsing it turns out that these words have returned to us like a boomerang, preserving their root basis, their sound history, which goes back to ancient times. And if you want to learn and to understand words, you need to be able to look into this story.

What do we know from the history of the language? I remind it very briefly. We know that Russian language belongs to the Indo-European language group. The concept of “Indo-Europeans” was formed relatively recently, when India was colonized. A little later, the English philologist William Jones, studying Sanskrit, an ancient Indian language, and comparing it with European languages, was one of the first to suggest that before the appearance of all these languages there was one, common to them, more ancient, some proto-Indo-European language. And then scientists came to the conclusion that there were even older languages, so-called Nostratic languages, common not only to Indo-Europeans, but also to other language groups.

But this is only the top layer of the story. Russian scientist Svetlana Burlak experimentally proves that even ants have their own language, and they are able to exchange information. The development of language is directly related to the evolution of man with the development of his brain, improving from simple to complex. But if we automatically inherit the brain with all its potential from our parents, from nature, then it is impossible to inherit knowledge. Knowledge is accumulated, but not inherited. I did not complain for nothing that the Greeks had lost the meaning of the metaphor of the myth of Sisyphus. For every new inhabitant of the planet, civilization begins with a void, from scratch. Every new inhabitant of the planet has to repass all the way that humanity has passed for hundreds, thousands and even millions years.

Continuity is very important here. Any violation of continuity in the transmission of knowledge leads to its distortion, loss, degradation, degeneration and even death. This can also be observed in the animal world especially when people try to return to the wild, for example, chicks who have lost their parents, and even teach them to fly on a hang glider. It’s much more complicated for a human. Neurolinguists believe that the mechanism of thinking in humans is triggered by speech sounds. Just those sounds of speech that we are considering and that accompanied it throughout its evolution. What does “launch” mean? Let’s assume that some sounds inherent in the life of the baby and its environment are installed on empty brain cells, after which the simplest cause-and-effect relationships are established between the sensations of the baby and the sounds. Gradually, these connections become more complex. This is very similar to installing an operating system on a computer, where consistency is also important.

Knowledge from simple to complex was passed down over many generations – first within the herd, within the pack, within the family. Then the way changed, subordinating the structure of knowledge: they improved. Science appeared, knowledge was multiplied and systematized. Once, about forty years ago, I heard the phrase “unnecessary knowledge” from a young aspiring scientist-teacher. The accumulated knowledge began to be sifted through the sieve of demand. As a result, all this resulted in a kind of standard cultural transmission, which both teachers and parents are still experimenting with. And since language is the main tool for knowledge transfer, any change in language related to its development also affected the continuity of knowledge transfer.

I give an example. Many of us studied from the famous textbook of the Russian language “Phonetics and morphology” by the authors Barkhudarov and Kryuchkov. Phonetics studies phonemes – speech sounds, morphology studies the structure of words – morphemes, roots and affixes. And the word “morfema” (morpheme) comes from the Greek word “morfa” (morph). Despite the fact that the Greek word “morph” has already changed significantly relative to the known protoroot “mr” or proto-Indo-European “mr-ti”—mertviy, umirat’ (dead, to die), it retains the root basis. That is, “morfa” (morth) is something dead, frozen and motionless.

Another thing is the Latin word “forma” (form) borrowed from the Greek. Although it retained the main phonemes and consonance with the word “morfa” (morph), but the root “mr” was changed, lost. Therefore, the word “forma” has become an abstract set of sounds with the same shade of dead and frozen, but the root basis has been lost. There was an interruption of continuity. It is similar to Shakespeare’s “Hamlet”: “The time is out of joint…”

Recently, on the website of the famous economist Mikhail Khazin, I read an article by Professor Vladimir Arnold, where he shared his experience of teaching mathematics in France. In the article, he complained about the growing number of students who simply remember information without understanding its essence. This is akin to our rote learning. We also had virtuosos at school who could memorize entire paragraphs – and not just memorize them, but even compile stories from them. Usually these virtuosos were admitted to the Humanities, where the lack of understanding can be compensated by memorizing. But this was about mathematics and eloquence can’t buy it. That’s why the Professor sounded the alarm.

There has always been a problem in the transmission of content and its perception. When I was a student at a Soviet school, at a Soviet Institute, the teachers constantly told us: “Try to understand the meaning, the content, do not get carried away with the form.” There was even a literary saying that the form is only a slave designed to serve the content.

We often underestimate what they are trying to convey to us. For example, etymology is considered to be a kind of entertainment, an educational quiz, although it is one of those sciences that can teach people to think by returning to the protolanguage and discovering “old new meanings”.

Russian language plays a special role. There are scientists who suggest that all the languages of the planet are descended from the Russian language. It is possible that the Russian language has been preserved better than other languages relative to the primordial language of mankind. But to say that all languages came from Russian is, of course, an ironic exaggeration. All languages have ancient roots. If, as geneticists believe, humanity comes from a single family, then we can assume that the origins of all languages are also hidden in the language of this ancient ancestral community. A well-known linguist Alexander Dragunkin, who is a professional English language learner, believes that for a better understanding of the language, you need to know Russian, which is a kind of key to the meanings of English words. I absolutely agree with it. And I believe that the same applies to the Greek language and to other language groups. Our language has preserved its attachment to its natural origin as much as possible, and its phonetic series has remained largely faithful to the oldest protoroots. We just need to get back to them.

Get to the truth

Any work requires a reliable tool – even if we decide to make a mental journey to the language’s origins. The science of etymology seems to have been created in order to restore broken connections in the meanings of words. It is designed to look inside the form, “in-form” about the origin and meaning of the word, to tell about its metamorphoses – what happened to this word once and what is happening to it now.

The word “etymology” (ττυμολογία) is a Greek word. It consists of two words: “etymon” (ττυμον) is the “truth” and “logos” (λόγος)is “to speak”. It was invented by ancient philosophers, who already understood perfectly well that without knowledge of the true meaning of the word, it is impossible to know the truth.

The first sound “e” indicates some kind of affiliation. In the words “ego” and “ekho” (echo), it explains that it is about the person. In the word “eco” is about something what surrounds person, about his\her home, environment. Behind the word “etika” (ethics) lies a reasonable, meaningful human activity. Even the word “efir” (ether) has its own identity – literally, “belonging to a hole” filled with something invisible, but necessarily all-encompassing and all-pervading. The words “Hellenic” and “Hellas” are about places that belong to my favorite Greeks, where “lada” is in the same semantic field as the Russian “lad” (harmony).

In the word “etymon” (the meaning of the word), the protoroot “mon” is the key, which means that truth is unique and “monarchical”, as well as harmony. “Mon” is the only one who brings food, who is the “master of offspring”, and any other “mn” can not be. These are the harsh conditions of existence. This protoroot has generated a lot of words, which emphasize the separateness, uniqueness, exclusivity. It is sound in the words “monakh” (monk) and “monarkh” (monarch), in the names Solomon and Suleyman; it can be found in the word “ataman” (father, senior man) and in the word “mongol” (mon-Ka-le, nomad).

The brilliant Russian conductor Teodor Curentzis once said that harmony is a point. How right he is! Harmony is the point, the unity, of which the first biblical commandment speaks. So “etymon” is a unified understanding of our actions, our existence. This is the truth.

The second part of the word “etymology” goes back to the biblical “logos” (word). Academician Dmitry Likhachev has repeatedly warned that we understand or interpret some ancient texts incorrectly. In his opinion, the translation of the gospel text: “In the beginning was “logos” (word\“slovo”)—incorrectly conveys the meaning of the word “logos”. In the ancient Greek Dictionary of Joseph Dvornitsky, “logos” has 34 different “nests of meanings”. In our reading, this word goes back to three ancient roots: “lo”, “kho” and “s”. The first has the meaning “beloved”, the second is the sound of breathing-means “dusha” (soul), and the third means “sacred water”. What meaning could these sounds have acquired over the centuries? We can agree with academician Likhachev that we are talking about what distinguishes man from the animal world – about the ability to think.

However, Likhachev could be wrong because as the great Russian poet Fyodor Tyutchev said: “A spoken thought is a lie.” Fedor Ivanovich knew perfectly well that the ancient Greek word “legu” is translated as “to speak”, but in Russian it is interpreted quite differently. Still, let’s focus on what is close to us. “Etymology” is the desire to get to the truth, to understand the meaning and essence of our being. Jesus Christ, pronouncing the Covenant: “Verily I say unto you,” I sincerely wanted people to get rid of lies, deception and delusions. So we are trying to understand and interpret the deep meaning of our language, our speech, our being.

Ancient prepositions

Wisdom teaches that if you are confused and can’t find the right way, go back and start all over again. This “technique” is acceptable even for functional parts of speech: prepositions, conjunctions, particles and interjections. Modern science does not give an unambiguous understanding of how these words occurred and where to look for their “primitive” meanings. My heart tells me that they were born together with the protoroots and have a similar nature.

Let’s start with the simplest – the ancient preposition “k”—in English “to”. If the sounds “kh”, “g “and"k” came from the human breath, then the ancient preposition “k” belongs to this group. Its meaning is close to the meaning of “way”, “direction”—where to go, what we will come to.

The preposition “o”—in English “about”—got its meaning not so much from the pronounced sound, but from the shape of the lips in which it is formed – around, about or about something.

The ancient preposition “u”—in English “near”—, being the sound of breathing, had a special connotation – it attracted the attention of a tribesman to some circumstance, phenomenon, object. It is the sound of moaning, the sound of crying. This is an “invitation” to come closer, to share others in your pain. Its later values are “near” or “around” or otherwise marked “accessory”, the closeness, the belonging to someone, a sense of ownership.

The sound “a”—in English [a] —was always the sound of an open mouth. It can have a variety of meanings. In combination with the sounds of feeding, it forms a combination of “ma” or “na”, indicating the desire to eat, the readiness to take food. A child will never ask to be fed with a combination of “m” and “o” sounds. The same applies to the combination of “na”, which we pronounce when we offer food to the child. By the way, I have repeatedly seen that a child, when holding out his hands to food, also utters a cherished and kind “na”, as opposed to a restrictive “no” (but).

Oddly enough, the ancient preposition “po”—in English “at”—is also formed from the sounds of breathing. “P “is the sound of “puffing”, the sound of “locking” the lips and then releasing the air with a little effort. It’s either puffing or farting. Over time, this sound has grown more complex meanings, has passed through centuries of evolution and now it denotes what surrounds us. The later meaning “along” appeared during numerous human journeys. But at the time when the first sounds and meanings were put into speech, people lived in burrows, and the preposition “po” had a very modest scale.

The preposition “s”—in English “with”—originally went back to the sounds of drinking and the protoroot “ms”. In some languages, the meaning of the words “drink”, “water” has retained the sound “m”, in others—“s”. The Japanese have preserved the root completely. In Hebrew, both the word “sea” and the word “water” retained the “m” sound. In Turkic languages “su” means water, in English—“sea”. However, the question remains, how was the preposition “s” formed with the meaning “together”? Most likely, its origin was connected with the rules of hunting, or some rules of visiting a water hole, or with the ancient instinct of emptying the bladder together.

In general, the combination the sounds of “puffing” and “water” in ancient times formed the root “ps”. It is found in many languages around the world – as well as protoroot “pkh”. Protoroot “pr” is also the sound of “puffing”, but not simple, but aggressive, when something is pierced or flatulence is released too deliberately.

Finally, derived from the breath sounds include protoroot “ku”. If taken literally, it meant “at the head”, “near the head”, something intelligent. Over time, it received several values. For example, the meaning of “ruka” (hand) is “separate from the head” but “with understanding”. From this root came such words as “kulak” (fist), “kul`tya” (stump\an amputated arm), “kul`tura” (culture). And the name Akulina since ancient times had the meaning “inept”, “crooked”, and this is inherent in the name, where the sound “a” is a certain opposite. The protoroot “ru” also has its origins. If “u” is “near”, then the aggressive “r” was intended to separate from this “near”, to become “separate”.

There are a number of prepositions, phonemes, and protoroots those are associated with the action of a person, with his\her contact with the environment, penetration into it. In this regard, the preposition “v”—in English “in\into\inside”—is interesting, it means effort, tension, desire to get inside something. It is directly related to the extraction of insects or small animals from hidden places: whether it is the stem of a plant, or the trunk of a tree, or a mink in the ground. Ancient man needed not only to search for food, but also to be able to extract it by looking inside. This explains why both the Russian word “zhivot” (belly) and the Latin word “vita” have the main sound “v”.

You can make out one of the forms of the preposition “v”—the basic word “vnutri” (inside). The sound “n” indicates the taste of food, protoroots “tr-dr” goes back to “aggressive poking”, or, simply, holed something or pierced. Protoroot “dr” is a “hole where delicious food is hidden” and you need to get to it. The ancient preposition “v” is also echoed by the sound “b”, which is related to it. In many cases, it expresses a kind of “passionate satisfaction”—both from the food taken, and from other pleasures, including sexual ones.

The possibility of penetration and contact brought to life the ancient prepositions “to”—in English “that”—and “do” (in English “this”). The “t” sound was a “poking” sound that indicated obstacles. These obstacles, as in a dense forest, can be around-hitting branches on the cheeks, blocking the way with tree trunks or making you stumble over rocks. Only after looking around and getting used to it, you begin to definitely designate a place with an obstacle—“to” (that) place, “eto” (this) place.

In the preposition “k”, the sonorous sound “d” only strengthens this meaning. “Do” is already a more serious obstacle, restriction, “pillars of Hercules”, beyond which movement is impossible. The meaning of this preposition has been preserved to this day, although it has expanded over the course of evolution, and received different shades, but the original meaning— “limited poking”—has been preserved in it.

Many different derived combinations have appeared from the original forms of these ancient prepositions. Vowel sounds complemented the meanings. The language was filled with various “to”, “ta”, “te”, “tam”, “do”, “da”. The last “da” is particularly interesting. The sound of a poke, an obstacle, coming into contact with an open vowel “a”, completely changes – like Cinderella after the wave of a magic wand. The vowel “a” indicates that the insurmountable obstacle, as it seemed at first, is no longer an obstacle, and the dirty rags have been replaced by a ball gown.

“Da” is consent, the abolition of borders, the abolition of obstacles. You mustn’t, but you can! This protoroot was very common in the everyday life of our forefathers, having the meaning of “consent” in sexual relationships. “Da” is permission for sexual contact. Already in those early days, the meaning of “consent” became associated with the possibility of coitus, that is, access to woman’s sexual organs, and later – with the female sexual organ. This meaning of “consent” to mating and the name of the female sexual organ formed many words that have survived to our time.

Obstacles served as the beginning of the appearance of the “do” and “no” roots, becoming a common mechanism for their appearance. Still, if the “do” meant a restriction, then the protoroot “no”, as opposed to the open “na”, was perceived as an objection or denial.

You can practice word formation using the oldest roots. Let “do” be a limited” poking”, a certain limit, and “no” is an objection, a negation. Combining them, we get the word “dono”– “dno” (bottom) that has been preserved to our time. It turns out that “dno” is the absence of a limit: a person pokes a stick into the water, and the stick does not rest anywhere. There is no stop, no limit. There is no “do”—deep to it. Now this word has the opposite meaning: a certain surface, a stop under water. But in the names of rivers, this combination of ancient prepositions had original meanings. “Dono” is a property of deep rivers that could not be forded. “Dono”—no limit, no bottom, it is deep. This original meaning is preserved in the ancient word “Avaddon” (Abaddon), which basically refers to the “abyss”. There are many toponyms\place names with this “dono” on the planet: the Don (river), Caledonia, Dongola, London, and hundreds of others.

Allowing yourself to experiment, you can “play” with the vowel “a”—the sound of food. If we take the same ancient preposition “do”, and put the protoroot “na” before it, we get the word “nado” (to need\must), which spoils everyone’s mood and forces them to mobilize all their personal resources. What is “nado”? This is a kind of “sweet need”, which is in the way of satisfying the ill-fated “do” is an obstacle. As a result, “nado” became a symbol of overcoming. Given that “na” has the meaning of “something located on top”, we can interpret this word as an action “over the limit”—a very common phenomenon of Russian life, which does not choose long paths, but goes through the mountains…

About the “mountain beginning” say protoroots “ay” [aɪ] and “ya”. They are often found in the names of mountains, ridges or mountain rivers. The combination of the sounds “y” and “a” is formed when we look up. If a person raises his head at the same time when pronouncing any sounds, then the vowels – first of all, the “a” sound come out unhindered. But as soon as the trachea bends, interrupting the air, a “i” sound appears. From this movement of the head two ancient protoroots appeared: “ay” is a movement up, “ya” is a movement down. Or simply: “ay”—at the top, “ya”—from top to the bottom.

There is a beautiful example to understand how words appeared in ancient times – this is the English word “ice”, consisting of two roots: “ay” and “s”. The first signified upward movement, the second is water. Where “above” could there be water? Only in the mountains, on icy snow-capped peaks. Therefore, the word “ice”—even without translation means frozen on the tops of “mountain water”. Protoroot “ay” gave the name of the white color. Where could the ancient people see the white color? Only on the snow-capped peaks of high mountains.

Sorting out such combinations is an exciting, useful, and even unpredictable activity, as we will see more than once. The main thing is to understand that all words have their origin in deep and “common” antiquity, growing out of meaningful sounds that our forefathers exchanged.