According to author Mark Kurlansky (
Concise Oxford Dictionary: A biography of a fish that
changed the world ), what substance etymologically binds the words
soldier and salad?
Etymology, Etymology, and more Etymology
as well as grammar, usage, euphemism, slang, jargon, semantics (meaning), linguistics, neologism, idiom, word origin, syntax, dialect, lexicon (vocabulary), diction, pidgin, synonym, antonym, homonym, cant, argot, lingo, and redundancy.
The critically-acclaimed board game
MooT
consists of tough questions about the nuances of the English language.
Answer:
salt
According to Kurlansky's book Salt ? A
World History:
"The Roman army required salt for
its soldiers and for its horses and livestock. At times soldiers were even paid
in salt, which was the origin of the word salary and the expressions worth his
salt andearning his salt. In fact, the Latin word sal became the French word
solde, meaning pay, which is the origin of the word soldier. Furthermore: "The
Romans salted their greens, believing this to counteract their natural
bitterness, which is the origin of the word salad, salted."
Note: this question works as a question because it is "according to
Mark Kurlansky" ? so salt is the correct answer because that's what Kurlansky
says the etymologies are. Unfortunately, the question doesn't work factually
because, according to the Concise Oxford Dictionary, the word soldier actually
derives from the Latin word solidus, which denotes a solid gold coin from the
later Roman Empire.
Thus far I have been unable to find
any source that shows that solidus derives from a Latin root that is related to
salt ? though because of the silimilarity between sol and sal, it sounds like
it should.
If anyone can set me straight on this, please
email me at: moot_mootgame.com
Please note that these are draft questions for the board game MooT.
If you spot an error or disagree with anything I've said here,
please let me know and I'll fix it.
(the Mootguy)
Feedback
You're right to challenge Kurlansky. These
really do come from two different Indo-European roots, ones that (unusually)
haven't changed their form: salary < sal-; soldier < sol ? 'solidus',
whence 'soldier' is cognate with 'solid.'
Kurlansky might
have become confused by the army story connected to 'salary.' Or (and this is
more complex) by the fact that the sol ? root does, in fact, have a variant
form sal ? (from the zero-grade form). But the words that come via that route
(pun intended) are related to Latin 'salvus' (safe), whence also salvage,
salvo, save; and 'salus' (health), whence salutary, salute.
This confusion shows why historical linguists are so picky about the
connections they draw. It's not enough for the sounds to resemble each other.
The roots must match sound and meaning, and make sense as part of the
reconstructed chain of sound changes that have occurred in the past. For
confirmation, see Calvert Watkins's appendix on Indo-European roots in the
American Heritage dictionary.
x-Karl Hagen
kthagen_eliteprep.com
______________________________________________________________
Copyright 1998-2008 Blair Arts Ltd. All rights reserved.