The badger cut has been called off, which I am glad of as the science is dodgy and badgers look cute.
The article I was reading had a lexical knot, which amused me. The adjective bovine was used more often than cow or cattle, whereas when it came to the badgers there "of badgers" or badgers used as adjectival noun. A cool side-effect of the mixture in English is that some nouns are Old English-derived but their adjectives are Latin-derived, (eg. eye and ocular, window and fenestral, mail and postal, technically "collateral adjectives"). The animals ones are quite cool as they mostly end in -ine.
Whereas lupine, asinine, equine, murine, ovine and bovine are commonly known, the rest are stuff for a Wikipedia lists (List of animal names is pretty terrible and littered with errors).
The adjective for badger is meline (I looked it up), so the article could have talked about meline TB.
Googling meline TB gives only a article obviously in The guardian.
What if we were not obsessed with the -ine adjectives?
We would still be stock actually. Badger is probably from badge + ard, so came about solely after 1500 and the only adjective is badgerly and badgerlike, which both mean behaving like a badger (and I assume smelling like one too).
The OE-derived word for badger is brock (from broc) and the adjective brockish means meline, badgerly or beastly. The meaning of brockish is as guessable as meline, so that is of little help.
An amusing twist is that broc is actually of Celtic origin (brocc in Old Irish). Whereas the germanic version is dasse (last used in ME; cognate with German Dachs; plural is dassen).
So meline is the only choice. In addition to the impenetrability of some of the Latin derived adjectives, there is also the problem of animals unknown to the romans or that they could not be bothered to tell apart.
In the endless lists of name of animal adjectives, what seems to happen is the genus name is converted. It works for certain animals, such as walruses, which are odobenine, but it gets into a muddle when the pus/pedis comes in. Are kangaroos and wallabies macropine or macropodine? Are octopuses octopine or octopodine?
The last one actually is case where the Romans could not be bothered telling animals apart. The Romans called both octopuses and polyps polypus, so when Linnaeus came along he made called the form octo- and left the other poly-, which makes sense. In Old English, they did not care either and they simply used the word cuttlefish to refer to all cephalopods (squid appeared from nowhere after the 1600s). Another case is rat. The Romans called mures both rats and mice, whereas the Germanic barbarians did and gave the mediaeval Latin rattus. As a consequence rattine is not commonly used, being a back formation. Rattish should be, but it is not scientific. Which is actually the reason in the first place why they are used…
No comments:
Post a Comment