Newsgroups: sci.lang.translation,sci.lang
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!news.mathworks.com!udel!gatech!swrinde!pipex!uunet!portal.austin.ibm.com!awdprime.austin.ibm.com!nice.austin.ibm.com!olivier
From: olivier@austin.ibm.com (Olivier Cremel)
Subject: Re: International Language.
Originator: olivier@nice.austin.ibm.com
Sender: news@austin.ibm.com (News id)
Message-ID: <D2H5wA.4oxq@austin.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 1995 01:38:34 GMT
Reply-To: olivier@glasnost.austin.ibm.com
References: <JEROEN.95Jan9153410@rulil1> <1995Jan9.215743.1541@midway.uchicago.edu> <D27xKM.1F4B@austin.ibm.com> <1995Jan14.152432.2244@midway.uchicago.edu>
Organization: Bull HN - Austin
Lines: 40
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu sci.lang.translation:718 sci.lang:34399


In article <1995Jan14.152432.2244@midway.uchicago.edu>, deb5@ellis.uchicago.edu (Daniel von Brighoff) writes:
> 
> First of all, this doesn't jibe with what Mr. Jelenc said about the
> origins of agentative suffixes in Romance.  Can you give a more detailed
> account of the origins of the "-euse" suffix?

-ator/-atrix gave -eur/-eresse

Those are the original agent suffixes. But a few centuries ago,
the final -r was not pronounced anymore (cf. verbs like aimer),
and -eur came to be confused with -eux (from -osius) whose counterpart
is -euse. Then -r came into existance agsin but the -eur/-euse part
was here to stay.

> Third, if I have actually erred by calling nouns in "-euse" derived
> from nouns in "-eur," I am in good company, for this is the way the
> situation is generally presented in grammars for learning French.
> Some talk of replacing the -eur ending with the -euse ending, but
> some make the blanket statement that nouns for persons are feminised
> by adding -e and then qualify this by mentioning the change of the r 
> of -eur to s among the various other "orthographic" irregularities.

Well, synchronically I guess it's acceptable. And I admit I mentionned
that etymology stuff as a rhetorical effect.

> Since to talk about sexism in language is to talk primarily about 
> people's perceptions, I think the popular explanation should carry
> more weight in this discussion than others. 

I'm still not convinced. Tool names for instance are derived from verbs
and take the -euse suffix, while the corresponding -eur form does not
exist. What do you make of that ?

By the way, sex/sexual in Latin meant female sex/female related.

-- 
Olivier.
=============================================================================
		"Tel se cuide chauffer qui s'art"
