Talk:English Wordbook/C

Funny tale: I used "ongo" last year in an essay. I meant it to mean "continue"; ya know, on the basis that "continuous" and "ongoing" mean the same thing. My lecturer underlined the word but commended me on creative use of language. Heh. BryanAJParry 22:40, 28 Dec 2005 (UTC)
 * Good for you! A word here and a word there is the most likely way that Anglish will get spread. If someone complains, or raises the point, I'ld simply say 'what did you think it meant?' Many times they can guess its meaning easier than a Romance word they've never heard. Oswax Scolere 23:10, 28 Dec 2005 (UTC)


 * Indeed. Altho I think I did tell you of another time when I was thoroly admonished by a teacher for using "forelast" (penultimate in Englandish). She knew what I meant, tho. She said not to make up words. Use penultimate. But if I must, use "the last but one". Well, I still use forelast. What can I say? Old Habits die hard. BryanAJParry 23:50, 29 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Doesn't kidnap refer specifically to the nabbing of children, not just capturing generally. I mean, you can't kidnap a man, right? BryanAJParry 15:09, 3 Jan 2006 (UTC)
 * I guess you're being humorous; I think everyone agrees an adult can be kidnapped -- That's certainly how it's used in the media. It just so happens that kids are easy to kidnap, hence it's factoring into the word(I guess). ~Inkstersco Jan 8 06
 * Actually I wasn't, but I think I musta been out of it. I agree with you. 82.44.212.6 18:27, 13 Jan 2006 (UTC)

Also, not all creams are salves. Should we make a note of that? I ask, as I have listed "salve" elsewhere for "ointment" (which I think fits the meaning better). BryanAJParry 15:11, 3 Jan 2006 (UTC)
 * True, but in some meanings the two words do match, and I think we ought to bear that in mind for all words. If we were simply to swap one word for another without thinking anent the setting of the word, then the overbringings would make little sense. We always must bear in mind which particulat meaning we have. Oswax Scolere 20:39, 13 Jan 2006 (UTC)
 * Fair dos, but we really ought to make that clear to newcomers, if you ask me. BryanAJParry 20:49, 13 Jan 2006 (UTC)

computer, electric n manchester, thundermighty manchester : I cannot for the life of me even begin to fathom this word. I guess it is one of yours, Ian; care to explain it, cos I am puzzled. :) 82.44.212.6 18:27, 13 Jan 2006 (UTC)
 * The Manchester is one of the earliest names for the electric computer -- The basic layout of processor, memory and fetch & execute cycle that we use today was forewrought at Manchester university in the 1940s in the aftermath of the golden age of codebreaking. It was a series of computers, rather than an single model, but it was defined by the things that define the electric computer today, unless the electric computer is something wild like a neural net, etc, which owes little to the Manchesters. Did the fact that it was elusive suggest that it was one of mine :) ~Inkstersco 13 Jan 06


 * Yes and no. I jsut couldn't imagine Oswax coming up with such an extravagant word. And I certainly know I didn't add it :D BryanAJParry 23:16, 14 Jan 2006 (UTC)
 * So do you reckon it's worthy of the moot or overly confusing? Inkstersco 10:34, 15 Jan 2006 (UTC)


 * I don't think it is overclear, but I do think that is is appropriate for the moot. BryanAJParry 14:11, 15 Jan 2006 (UTC)

A recent post by unnamed (I think it might be your IP, Ian), notes on the edit "law is an Anglo-Saxon word". Actually, it is a Norse word, but it was in Anglo-Saxon. But what is the significance of stating its origins? I am a little puzzled. It ain't important, tho, I'm just curious. :) Bryan 82.44.212.6 20:23, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure where why or whether I wrote it. Law is a good Anglish word on every level so I'm not sure whjat's going on :-S 81.157.242.12 09:37, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Civilisation=Tamefolkhood
I quite like the folkhood bit, and I certainly think it should be, therefore, SOMETHINGfolkhood, but I'm not so sure about "tame". What does everyone else think? BryanAJParry 01:16, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

I got "tame" through the word "civil" meaning "calm, and peaceful".70.242.2.31 03:12, 24 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Lose the "folk". Maybe tamehood. Alright, what is Civilisation? It's widespread organisation of communication, cumulative knowledge, town planning, refined behavior -- All the things that come from a commitment to widespread co-operation. We lack a word for Civil and Organised. I say let's not jump the gun until we do. Inkstersco 08:45, 24 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Maybe 'tamehood' is too near to meaning 'domestication' (thought I dare say that 'civilization' and 'domestication' are somewhat alike!). I think that 'civilization', like 'culture' and 'society', is one of those words which we are wont to say or write, but giving little thought to what they truly mean.


 * Getting to the root meaning of a word, like Inkstersco said, is the key. It is working together, living together, leaning on others for the work they do, and others leaning on us for our work. But moreso it means writing, lore, thought, indeed so many things, as well as a general 'good thing' feeling anent a way of life. Finding one word to sum this up is hard.


 * I think that maybe a word ending in '-life' or '-living' could be a good start, but what word to put before it? 'Townliving' may be too soft, and 'rightliving' would only bear the meanings of 'civilized is better'. Is there a good word for 'developed', 'mature' or 'sophisticated'? Oswax Scolere 10:40, 24 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Aha! Aha! The Wilderless! Gosh that was clever of me. Or, how about, Boundliving? Tamelife? It's sure good to be back in civilisation! Hmm...I don't like it to be too towny; The figureheads of our civilisation prefer the country. Lawlife?Inkstersco 16:06, 24 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Aha! Kemptlife? Kemptliving? Kemptman would also be a good word for Gentleman, for what does Gentleman mean today, if not "civilised man"? Inkstersco 12:30, 26 March 2006 (UTC)


 * To be honest, all this chatter is just making me think "civilisation" is an alright word afterall. I mean, Anglish isn't a "Pure" language. No language is. For what it's worth, the German word is Zivilisation, the Dutch are beschaving and ontwikkeling, and the Swedish is civilisation'. The two Dutch words translate, more-or-less exactly, as: "begrazing" and "development/growth", so far as I can make out. Both pretty crap, to be honest. In this vein, perhaps "settle(d)hood" or "fieldtendinghood", or something. I say stick with "civilisation", tho. :) BryanAJParry 20:08, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
 * But Bryan, many Romance words are alright words, but that's not the point. Indeed, Latin itself is an alright language. If a writer finds Civilisation to be an alright word, he or she will use it. However, we provide the option to use non-Romance for whatever reason. I agree that Civilisation is better than your two suggestions, but that's because your two suggestions are ugly, so there :P Inkstersco 21:33, 26 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure I agree, to be honest. It **seems** that there is no option available for "civilisation". Given the fact that most other Germanic languages seem to use the word "Civilisation", too, perhaps that is further evidence that there really isn't need for an Anglish equivelant. Our words for Civilisation are all kinda crap. Therefore, instead of cluttering up the wordbook (which is sorta supposed to be "official".. kinda...) with shitty words, why not just save it for half-decent ones, and let individual writers decide for themselves what "civilisation" should be? There is no point "providing the option" if our options are shit. :P 82.44.212.6 21:41, 26 March 2006 (UTC)


 * But, if you INSIST there need be a word for it (:P :P :P :P), then it must have something to do with what defines civilisation as opposed to pre-history. the obvious two things are written records, and staying in one place for a while/tending crops. Bryan 82.44.212.6 21:44, 26 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I agree that to keep up the public image of Anglish, no word at all is better than an inelegant word. I believe in quality over quantity. Better than both of them however, is an elegant A-S word. There are non-shitty words for civilisation. Kemptliving almost sounds natural. Wilderless almost does, if not a little whimsical. I agree with keeping bad words away from public eyes but I don't see why Civilisation is so elusive. We just have to use our intelligence to find a solution -- nobody said it was easy. 81.157.113.222 06:35, 27 March 2006 (UTC)


 * "Civilisation" means an orderly society with some form of government. "Rike" or "town" (maybe with endings added) may work for this. If you think of the sentences in which "civilisation" occurs, I bet you could replace it most of the time with "city" (town) or "state" (rike) or "way of life". We could try "rikecraft" but this is used for "politics", I think. "Rikestead" might mork. Maybe "rikesome" or "rikeish" for "civilised". ~ Tom 8.11.06

Citizen is Incast
Is that as opposed to "outcast"? Quite an interesting formation. :) Bryan 82.44.212.6 22:40, 24 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Aye. Incast could just mean a member of a group. Inkstersco 10:50, 2 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Note: The real word for Citizen is Freeman. ~Inkstersco

Castle
This word, whilst a borrowing, did exist in OE (so my sources tell me). Bryan 82.44.212.6 09:31, 3 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Yup, but wouldn't something like "burg" be more appropriate, considering that borough meant in Middle English "a castle or fortified dwelling" aswell as "dwelling, refuge, stronghold" according to Chambers Dictionary of Etymology. Also the cognates for "borough/burg" in other Germanic languages mean "castle". Padraig 16.06.2006


 * The older english shape of of the word is "chester" or "caster" as seen in various place names. "Castel", from "castellum", the lesser (diminuative) shape of "castrum"[a fort] was reborrowed after 1066. Both derive from Romish. I to think "burg" is word, holding the same meaning of "fortress" or "fortified town".--Jrmints 12:51, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Complete
One of the Anglish words for complete is finish. Isn't finish a French word?


 * Quite right. However, whoever added "finish" had a serious point. Namely, that it is far plainer are more readily understood than "complete". Anglish isn't about PURE 100% Germanic, because that is nonsense. However, it is arguable that "finish" should be outtaken for it is not Germanic. However, I would argue for its staying, as it is impossible to be 100 "pure", and finish is far more naturalised and so forth. Bryan 82.44.212.6 13:04, 4 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Then where should we draw the line? What makes a word Anglish or not? Does it leave out straight-from-Latin words only or does it also leave out Latin-through-French words too? Is the year 1220 a good cut off year for un-Germanic words? How about words coming through French through Frankish or Dutch? Help me understand please.70.241.28.212 22:48, 4 June 2006 (UTC)


 * The simple answer is, I'm afraid, we don't have a WATERTIGHT idea of what is good Anglish and what is not. We are hoping such agreements will come in time. Anglish is very much an evolving beast (altho me, Oswax, and Ian already have agreed certain fundamentals of the "project"). What do we have agreed (set me right, someone, if you disagree), is that: words attested before oct 14th 1066 are automatically acceptable, words which follow the analogy and rules of English words are acceptable, non-Germanic words where an alternative cannot be foudn are to be (indefinitely) accepted. But there are these problems. I think, for the purposes of clearness, maybe we should just ignore "complete" and "finish" altogether. The only problem with that is, when we need to have a word for the concept in a writ, what do we do? The obvious answer is just use the plainer word (finish), but just don't bother to list "finish" or "complete" in the wordbook. What say ye? Bryan 82.44.212.6 17:30, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Addendum: I was thinking of drawing up a list of words attested before 1066, just for everyone's sake. Do you reckon that's a good idea? Would it be useful? :) Bryan 82.44.212.6 17:30, 5 June 2006 (UTC)


 * That would be cool. :) 70.241.28.212 20:51, 5 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Also, we tend to opt for words which are attested later. In otherwise, just borrowing the entire wordstock of Old English would not do. It would solve our problems, but it wouldn't work for this project. The brief is to make best use of the Germanic resources of English. Therefore, we TEND to shy away from words not attested after, say, 1400/1500. But words before this ruff date are fine, so long as there is a compelling reason, or it is felt the word is essential or still understandable. :) Bryan 82.44.212.6 17:33, 5 June 2006 (UTC)


 * How about using "(all) done" or "ended" for "complete" and "finished"? Let's stick to Anglo Saxon.

Withloud
"Withloud" for "consonant". It's a worthy try. I certainly understand the homeborn word "loud" is "sound" in the other Germanic languages. HOWEVER, I just don't think it works in English; the meaning of "loud" has shifted too much, I feel. Bryan BryanAJParry 20:19, 5 June 2006 (UTC)


 * I don't see the problem. "Loud" in English is an adjective, but the substantive "a loud" could be used to represent "noise"? Padraig 16.06.2006


 * Hmm. But you have to think, "what IS a consonant?". All sounds have noise/sound. In fact, vowels are more resonant than consonants, and some consonants are loud whilst some are rather quiet. So it's a bit of a misnomer. And of course, we must define sounds in speech, because it isn't needfully just vowels vs. consonants, but, say, continuants versus stops (sounds where the sound can ongo, against sounds where the sound cannot be held). Essentially, tho, vowels are made with no constriction, and consonants are made with constriction (not even essentially true, but it is a mite more accurate than "consonants" have sound whilst "vowels" do not). William Barnes (dead poet, linguist, teacher, priest, Anglish champion) said "breathsound" for "vowel", which isn't bad, and "breath-penning" or "clipping" for "consonant", which isn't great. I don't have any better ideas, but let's not be hasty. :) BryanAJParry 20:13, 18 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Open-something could be vowel? Stuff like Withdin etc is a bit cryptic. ~Inkstersco

What about "Withdin"? Din being a synonym for "Noise". Might be a bit ambitious but I thought I'd try. 212.50.170.190 11:31, 11 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Could something-clink work?, cf Dutch 'Klinker'. 213.249.239.59 04:36, 19 November 2006 (UTC)


 * "Klinker" is a good find. Dutch "klink" is related to English "clench" so "klinker" has a sense of the many narrowing movements by which consonants are formed. Perhaps "klinker" might be anglicized as "clencher".--Jrmints 16:44, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

I found for consonant samodswēġend (samod-sweedg+end), meaning: samod "at the same time" + swēġan "to sound" + end "suffix: accusative)". So basically it means samod-soundend. if we kind find a word for samod or simultaneous. we could probably use that. --Lord ratman 08:04, October 13, 2009 (UTC)

Confiscate-Filch
I have never heard "filch" used to mean anything other than "steal". Surely "take away" is a better word for "confiscate". :) Bryan BryanAJParry 23:00, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
 * The dictionary said it means to steal something "furtively", especially something of trivial value. This conjours images of teachers swiping catapults from small boys as they stroll quietly down the corridor. Moreover, confiscation is a kind of little theft. ~Inkstersco
 * Hmm... maybe. I don't like it, but there we are. In my dialect, "filch" would never be used of confiscation. :) Bryan BryanAJParry 13:48, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
 * It was never part of my word-power, and if it clashes with yours I guess we should bin it and look eslewhere. Inkstersco 14:37, 5 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, I don't know about that. It doesn't work in my dialect, but let's just leave it for the mean time... or eke out the entry. :) Bryan 82.44.212.6 09:36, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Choose-??
This word is oft used but it is difficult to think of what to switch it to.


 * 'Choose' is an Anglish word, there is no need to swap it for anything. Though note that 'choice' is French. Oswax Scolere 11:36, 11 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Top Tip. Any workword that makes its past tenses with a vowel shift and/or by adding "-en" is nearly always OE. I give "Choose, chose, chosen" to show this. This is not always so with the "-ed" workwords. Tom.


 * Agreed. Most (but not all) irregular workwords in English are homeborn. So there would be no need to swap these words. 83.100.224.15 10:50, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Commission/commissioner
How should this word be approached?

These words are etymologically derived from the same root as "commit", which already has the genuine Anglish crossmatch of "betake." This seems to prima facie be the most obvious basis for crafting anglish crossmatches of commissioner but this only seems to capture the active sense of the word, wheras "commissioner" is muchly from the passive sense. Therefore I put it that a new way be made.

The sothwudlore of the Latin is a good spot to start. Com- + mittere would render bysend. I would say that bysenter/ster.

Another way to go would be to look at the word ombudsman which is from the Old Norse umboðsmaðr meaning "deputy" or "plenipotentiary" which is from the verb umboð "commission" from the wordbits um "anent" + boð "behest". Thus if I replace "anent" with "of", and contract the "of" to "o", then we have obiddiner (masc) and obidster (fem). In both cases the emphasis should go on the -bid-. I must say that I like this one.

Maybe "bysending" could be "commission", "bysenter" could be "commissioner", and "obiddiner" could be "minister"?

I should like your feedback on this.

- Mr Bozo, 13 July
 * A creative idea, and not a bad one. It's ideas such as this that make me think we should have a more databased system, that allows for explanations of the origin of each word. 146.176.49.55 09:28, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Commit suicide
Suicide = selfmurder. So perhaps the commit bit could be set over so as to render the phrase: "make selfmurder", "bego selfmurder" or "beget selfmurder" (my favourite). Ideas? Bryan 82.44.212.6 21:43, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Selfslaughter is a more objective word for suicide. Murder implies injustice. Also, it fits in with other legal jargon such as Manslaughter. ~Inkstersco
 * I'm asking about the "commit" part. Both "Self-murder" and "self-slaughter" are attested. In any case, I disagree with you; "slaughter", to you, has no negative connotations......? So, the "commit" part of the phrase "commit suicide"..? Bryan 82.44.212.6 10:51, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Bego is alright. How about wreak? ~Inkstersco
 * A bit "value"-y ;) But I agree that wreak is also appropriate. We agree that "Selfmurder/slaughter you/him/herself" is just clunky and redundant? In Swedish, they say "Bego selfmurd[er]". "Bego" is their way of saying "commit". Bryan 82.44.212.6 14:26, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
 * How is the Swedish "Bego" spelt? "Wreak selfslaughter" sounds quite eloquent to me, unless Wreak has negative baggage. ~Inkstersco
 * In Swedish, it is "begå självmord". Bryan 82.44.212.6 12:35, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Burg
I was just wondering about the correct spelling of "burg". As far as I can tell, it's left only in placenames nowadays. However, if the word had lived on to modern times, wouldn't it be "bury" now, according to regular sound shifts? I mean, it is pronounced like "bury" anyway isn't it? Padraig 14.11.2006


 * I don't know what word you mean, is it as in 'city'? I would use the word 'borough' because that is what the Old English word 'burg' became. The other 'burg' is an Americanism, extracted from placenames, but neither it nor 'bury' are words. Oswax Scolere 16:59, 14 November 2006 (UTC)


 * In modern English, which is what Anglish is based on, Burg means City and Borough means the District of a city. Both are unconventional, but those are the latest meanings of each word. Burg is informal but using informal words is part of the resourcefulness of Anglish. ~Inkstersco


 * Yup, it's in 'city'. I was just wondering, that if the word "burh/burg" in OE would have evolved to modern English times, wouldn't it be written "bury", as would seem logical (gieldan became yield, gellan became yell, -ig became -y and so on... )? Padraig 16.11.2006


 * One can only guess what would have happened. Anyway, what-ifs are irrelevant. Anglish is about adapting modern English, not re-evolving older English along different lines. Talk of the past is only relevant in deciding what morphemes we are allowed to use. ~Inkstersco

=Cinder=

Cinder is not a borrowed word, although its spelling was influenced by French. 83.100.175.11 11:01, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

=Bar?=

Bar is pure Latin, and a weak synonym for Cafe, compared to coffee shop and coffee house. Inkstersco 19:11, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

=Candle=

Candle is from OE. Inkstersco 09:36, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

=China, word-hunting, red book and yellow book=

I overset China as the Middle Kingdom, as i found it to be another name for that land. To gainsay this, one might say that the yorish Middle Kingdom isn't the same land as it is today, but neither does today's China have much to do with the Qin kingdom. Also, the Chinish tung (Hanish? Middlish?), the word for China is Zhongguo "middle land".

Word-hunting is an oversetting of the Dawnlandish (Japanese) word Kotobagari. Narrowly, it has to do with politically incorrect words, not filthy words.

Red book and yellow book as oversettings of audio CD and CD-ROM come from the Rainbow Books, which are a gathering of set ways that outline the ways in which CDs can be brooked. --Schreiter 04:37, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

I think we should denote china with an "eastern" prefix. forereasoning: middle kingdom is what we call egyptland in the  11th-12th powerships. china = eastern mid-kingdom.--Lord ratman 03:47, October 14, 2009 (UTC)

=Ruth unattested?= I bore ruth over to the attested upright, as it seems to be attested by my understanding of attestation. If being unattested means being out of mean brooking, well, oops. --Schreiter 20:50, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

ceaster is ceasers town
I looked up on etmyonline and dictionary.com and found that Chester is formed from the OE term Ceaster which means a Romish town or city. Just wondering if it should outtaken? --Lord ratman 02:09, October 15, 2009 (UTC)-lord ratman

I think of "Chester" - like "monger"- as true OE. & Anglish loan words. Let's leave them in. Sholto 11:46, October 15, 2009 (UTC)

Christ/Christian/Christianity
Since "Christ" is of latin/greek roots and by etymonline.com, "The L. term drove out O.E. hæland "healer" as the preferred descriptive term for Jesus". So maybe we should use Healer, or maybe The Healer for Christ. I don't know what to put for the other two though. Jeimi 07:20, July 14, 2010 (UTC)


 * I myself don't think "Christ" should be overset. Though it may have begun as a title, in Modern English it's pretty much a personal name, meaning only that one particular individual Jesus Christ. Personal names don't need to be overset, and they're really quite different from their literal meaning or etymology. "Sophocles" ultimately meant "known for wisdom" or somesuch, but we can probably agree that we shouldn't replace every mention of "Sophocles" with "Wisdomknown." Besides, if "healer" is used to mean "doctor" as discussed here: http://anglish.wikia.com/wiki/Talk:English_Wordbook/D?cb=3923, there would be confusion.The great underseeker 23:35, July 15, 2010 (UTC)