Epistemological metaphors and meanings

« previous post | next post »

Following up on the issues raised yesterday in "Feelings, beliefs, and thoughts",  it might be helpful to explore the etymology of the various  verbs that people commonly use to express the epistemic status of their assertions. From their entries in the Online Etymological Dictionary, we'll learn that several common propositional attitude verbs have roots in sensation, motion and emotion, just as feel does.

believe:

Old English belyfan "to believe," earlier geleafa (Mercian), gelefa (Northumbrian), gelyfan (West Saxon) "believe," from Proto-Germanic *ga-laubjan "to believe," perhaps literally "hold dear, love" (cognates: Old Saxon gilobian "believe," Dutch geloven, Old High German gilouben, German glauben), ultimately a compound based on PIE *leubh- "to care, desire, love"

think:

Old English þencan "imagine, conceive in the mind; consider, meditate, remember; intend, wish, desire" (past tense þohte, past participle geþoht), probably originally "cause to appear to oneself," from Proto-Germanic *thankjan (cognates: Old Frisian thinka, Old Saxon thenkian, Old High German denchen, German denken, Old Norse þekkja, Gothic þagkjan).   Old English þencan is the causative form of the distinct Old English verb þyncan "to seem, to appear" (past tense þuhte, past participle geþuht), from Proto-Germanic *thunkjan (cognates: German dünken, däuchte). Both are from PIE *tong- "to think, feel" which also is the root of thought and thank.   The two Old English words converged in Middle English and þyncan "to seem" was absorbed, except for its preservation in archaic methinks "it seems to me."

reckon:

c. 1200, recenen, from Old English gerecenian "to explain, relate, recount," from Proto-Germanic *(ga)rekenojan (cognates: Old Frisian rekenia, Middle Dutch and Dutch rekenen, Old High German rehhanon, German rechnen, Gothic rahnjan "to count, reckon"), from Proto-Germanic *rakina- "ready, straightforward," from PIE *reg- "to move in a straight line," with derivatives meaning "direct in a straight line, rule" (see regal).

Intransitive sense "make a computation" is from c. 1300. In I reckon, the sense is "hold an impression or opinion," and the expression, used parenthetically, dates from c. 1600 and formerly was in literary use (Richardson, etc.), but came to be associated with U.S. Southern dialect and was regarded as provincial or vulgar.

suppose:

early 14c., "to assume as the basis of argument," from Old French suposer "to assume" (13c.), probably a replacement (influenced by Old French poser "put, place") of *suppondre, from Latin supponere "put or place under; to subordinate, make subject," from sub "under" (see sub-) + ponere "put, place" (past participle positus; see position (n.)). Meaning "to admit as possible, to believe to be true" is from 1520s.

conclude

early 14c., "end an argument," from Latin concludere "to shut up, enclose," from com- "together" (see com-) + -cludere, comb. form of claudere "to shut" (see close (v.)). Meaning "reach a mental conclusion, deduce" is from late 14c., a sense also in Latin.

imagine:

mid-14c., "to form a mental image of," from Old French imaginer "sculpt, carve, paint; decorate, embellish" (13c.), from Latin imaginari "to form a mental picture, picture to oneself, imagine" (also, in Late Latin imaginare "to form an image of, represent"), from imago "an image, a likeness" (see image (n.)). Sense of "suppose, assume" is first recorded late 14c.

feel

Old English felan "to touch or have a sensory experience of; perceive, sense (something)," in late Old English "have a mental perception," from Proto-Germanic *foljan (cognates: Old Saxon gifolian, Old Frisian fela, Dutch voelen, Old High German vuolen, German fühlen "to feel," Old Norse falma "to grope"), from PIE root *pal- "to touch, feel, shake, strike softly" (cognates: Greek psallein "to pluck (the harp)," Latin palpare "to touch softly, stroke," palpitare "to move quickly"), perhaps ultimately imitative.

In Germanic languages, the specific word for "perceive by sense of touch" has tended to evolve to apply to the emotions. The connecting notion might be "perceive through senses which are not referred to any special organ." Sense of "be conscious of a tactile sensation, sense pain, pleasure, illness, etc.; have an emotional experience or reaction," developed by c. 1200, also "have an opinion or conviction;" that of "to react with sympathy or compassion" is from mid-14c. Meaning "to try by touch" is from early 14c. From late 14c. as "know (something) beforehand, to have foreknowledge of." To feel like "want to" attested from 1829.

 



26 Comments

  1. Guy said,

    May 2, 2016 @ 1:17 pm

    Since the expression that started this discussion was "feel like", it might be worth note that the word "like" is derived from a word meaning "body", the metaphor being that having the form or body of something can be generalized to other types of similarity. Modern English cognates of "like" are the adverbial suffix -ly and the word "lich", meaning "body" or "corpse", but perhaps more familiar in some circles today from the fantasy genre via Tolkien and fantasy role-playing games.

  2. Irina said,

    May 2, 2016 @ 1:39 pm

    The Dutch for "suppose" is veronderstellen, which is a literal translation ("to put under").

  3. Irina said,

    May 2, 2016 @ 1:40 pm

    Also besluiten "conclude", verbeelden "imagine".

  4. DWalker said,

    May 2, 2016 @ 2:25 pm

    I always think of "reckon" being somewhere between "said by a farmer" and "related to arithmetic", like "I'll reckon the amounts you owe for them supplies by adding up these here numbers".

  5. Bob Ladd said,

    May 2, 2016 @ 2:27 pm

    Slightly off topic, but it's worth noting that reckon meaning 'hold an impression or opinion' does not have the provincial or vulgar overtones in BrEng that it does in AmEng. This is definitely one of those things that strikes a transplanted AmEng speaker as surprising at first.

  6. Guy said,

    May 2, 2016 @ 2:51 pm

    @Bob Ladd

    I think it's interesting that many of the traits perceived as low status markers in AmEng are present in English accents perceived as high prestige by Americans. Take non-rhoticity, which is often mocked by Americans as sounding uneducated when the speaker is American, but not when the speaker is English, where it is often perceived as refined.

  7. BZ said,

    May 2, 2016 @ 3:05 pm

    @Guy,
    I don't think non-rhoticity sounds uneducated at all. Non-standard, characteristic of a certain region, but not uneducated. This is likely because said region doesn't have stereotypically negative connotations. "Reckon" on the other hand, is a southernism in the US. And the south does have a negative stereotype in the US. When a British person says something that carries a negative stereotype in the US, it doesn't automatically sound refined. It's more of a "wow, I didn't know they use that word too. How odd".

  8. Brett said,

    May 2, 2016 @ 3:33 pm

    @Guy: I don't think Tolkien used the word "lich" in the more modern, undead sense. (In fact, I don't recall that he used it at all in his major published works, nor can I find any reference to him using it via Google.) On the other hand, Clark Ashton Smith was fond of using "lich" for animated corpses, probably first in "The Abominations of Yondo," and I associate the undead sense as originating with him. Smith dropped out of school in after eighth grade and learned much of his obscure vocabulary from reading dictionaries; as a result, he sometimes tended to use uncommon words in peculiar or, frankly, nonstandard ways. It was probably through the influence of Smith (and likely other authors, although I'm not sure who) that the undead "lich" was included in Dungeons & Dragons, which was the most important vehicle for spreading the new meaning of the word.

  9. Orin Hargraves said,

    May 2, 2016 @ 4:18 pm

    In light of the etymologies I think, feel, and believe that these verbs are conceptual metaphors arising from image schemas based mainly on bodily interaction, and perhaps partly on motion. Will language-enabled robots or other AI ever be able to master such concepts arising from sophisticated and nuanced bodily experience? Hard to imagine.

  10. Guy said,

    May 2, 2016 @ 4:38 pm

    @Brett

    My recollection was that Tolkien used "lich" in its ordinary sense of "corpse" in the Lord of the the Rings and this influenced or inspired the use of the word for the undead creature in Dungeons and Dragons, but I could be confabulating.

  11. Ralph J Hickok said,

    May 2, 2016 @ 4:49 pm

    Non-rhoticity is a major feature of the Boston Brahmin accent, which is often mocked in the phrase "pah a cah in Hahvuhd Yahd," but certainly because it's a low status marker.

  12. Ralph J Hickok said,

    May 2, 2016 @ 4:56 pm

    Sorry …. should have been "pahk" instead of "pah." This copy editor needs a copy editor :)

  13. Chris C. said,

    May 2, 2016 @ 7:20 pm

    @Guy — You're probably thinking of "wight". I recall no instances of "lich" in LOTR.

  14. Eric P Smith said,

    May 2, 2016 @ 8:00 pm

    @Bob Ladd: As you say, reckon meaning "hold an opinion" is standard BrE. I reckon it answers to AmE figure.

  15. Coby Lubliner said,

    May 2, 2016 @ 9:31 pm

    It's interesting that sentire, Latin for 'feel', acquired different additional meanings in Romance: 'smell' in French, 'hear' in Italian and Catalan, 'regret' in Spanish and Portuguese.

  16. Brett said,

    May 2, 2016 @ 9:36 pm

    @Chris C.: Yes, that's right! I felt like there was another piece of the puzzle that I was overlooking. For those not familiar: The wight was also a standard undead monster in Dungeons & Dragons (modeled explicitly after Tolkien's barrow-wight), based on the idiosyncratic use of the name in The Fellowship of the Ring.

  17. Sean M said,

    May 3, 2016 @ 4:20 am

    What about the class of "lexical perfects" derived from verbs of sensing, like Classical Greek οιδα "to know < to have seen" (root wid- like Latin video) or Akkadian idû "to know"? In English we "wrestle with a problem" until we "have a good grasp on it" or "have a feel for the solution."

  18. ardj said,

    May 3, 2016 @ 5:10 am

    @Brett: I think only the "barrow-" part was idiosyncratic: cf. Beowulf: Wiht unhælo, grim and grædiʒ

  19. KeithB said,

    May 3, 2016 @ 8:40 am

    It is very important to get the terminology right, for example it is not a good idea to say "I believe in evolution" to a creationist since that puts you on the same footing. You need to say something like " the theory of evolution is well supported by the facts and evidence."

    (And I am trying to remember if Tolkien used lich during the passage of the dead marshes.)

  20. Robert Coren said,

    May 3, 2016 @ 9:16 am

    @Eric P Smith: Indeed, as I was looking at Mark's list of words I was wondering where "figure" would fit.

    @KeithB (as to Tolkien using lich in reference to the Dead Marshes): I don't think so, but I'm too lazy to go downstairs and check.

    @ardj: Perhaps what @Brett meant by "idiosyncratic" was Tolkien's use of "wight" to refer to an undead spirit, rather than just a fellow of some sort.

  21. ardj said,

    May 3, 2016 @ 11:46 am

    @Robert Coren re @Brett

    Yup but cf. OED 2nd ed.,1989 CD-rom: wight 1b, e.g. c. 950 Lindisfarne Gospel: Mark vi.49 Phantasma, yfel wiht (King James: spirit)

  22. AntC said,

    May 4, 2016 @ 1:11 am

    @Irina Dutch veronderstellen should be cognate with English understand – which Mark doesn't mention.

    @Colin L Latin sentire is cognate with English sense so there's both "feel" and "apprehend" and "sense"/"nonsense" and "sensible". And both measuring equipment and researchers being "sensitive (to)".

  23. Rodger C said,

    May 4, 2016 @ 6:52 am

    "St. Austin and St. Benedight, save this house from wicked wight."

  24. chris said,

    May 10, 2016 @ 6:42 pm

    @Rodger C: But is "wicked wight" intended to be understood as redundant, or is it more like "bad guy", where the noun without the adjective is just any guy? (Never mind the etymology of "guy"…)

    Gricean considerations would lean toward the latter; if all wights are wicked, no need to mention it, it would be like saying "huge giant". And it's not like saving the house from wicked *people* is an unreasonable thing to ask of saints either.

    A barrow-wight, on the other hand, lives (er, dwells?) in a barrow, which is a grave, so the spookiness is already implied. It's the D&D writers who reduced it just to "wight" while keeping the undead sense who altered the meaning. Qualifiers are important.

    P.S. Are "sense" and "sensibility" true cognates, and if so, how did they diverge enough to be contrasted in a book title?

  25. Alon Lischinsky said,

    May 11, 2016 @ 2:52 am

    @Coby Lubliner: sentir ‘hear’ is perfectly idiomatic Spanish too (e.g., lo sentí gritar cuando era torturado ‘I heard him cry out when he was being tortured’), as is sentir ‘regret’ in Catalan (e.g., ho sento molt ‘I'm very sorry’).

  26. Alon Lischinsky said,

    May 11, 2016 @ 3:00 am

    @chris: they are indeed cognates: sense < OFr sens < L. sensus < sentio ‘I feel’ < PIE *sent-. Sensibility < L. sensibilitas < sensibilis < sentio.

RSS feed for comments on this post