Spitzer Etymology of Pet

8/10/2019 Spitzer Etymology of Pet

1/7

Linguistic Society of merica

On the Etymology of petAuthor(s): Leo SpitzerSource: Language, Vol. 26, No. 4 (Oct. - Dec., 1950), pp. 533-538Published by: Linguistic Society of AmericaStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/410403.

Accessed: 25/11/2014 22:37

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at.http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Linguistic Society of Americais collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access toLanguage.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 128.135.12.127 on Tue, 25 Nov 2014 22:37:06 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=lsahttp://www.jstor.org/stable/410403?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/410403?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=lsa


2/7

MISCELLANEA

533

*-md-n-,

the

-n-

being

part

of

a suffix

-no-

(perhaps

with a

passive

meaning,

as

in

TfKVoo?).

The

second

explanation

seems

preferable.

(3)

In

pipyva,

pEpLE~laV

cf.

Boisacq

627

f.;

Ernout-Meillet

605),

it

seems

more

probable

that

the

-v-

is due to

a

dissimilatory change

*r-r

>

p-v.

Al-

though

in

Greek the

only

common dissimilation of *r-r is

regressive,

resulting

in

---p

(cf. Schwyzer

1.259),

the

comparison

with

pEXL/Eo0aXL

points

to the con-

clusion

that

progressive

dissimilations

do

occur

in

reduplicative

formations

of

this kind.

The

interpretation

of

giptyva

etc.

as

reduplicative

is

strengthened

by

the

parallel

formations

in the

epic language:

p~p4upa,

yeplzplw,

etc.

Although

it

cannot

be

proved,

it

seems

possible

that

all

these

forms

had an

intensive

quality,

which

perhaps

was

originally

developed

from an iterative

meaning (still

partly

preserved

in

l4&ivmos?).

Thus

the

identification

with the

Sanskrit type seems fully justified.

The

interpretation

of

Skt.

/i

as

IE

i makes

it

necessary

to

explain

the

change

of

quantity

in

the

vowel-a

very

common, though

unexplained, phenomenon

when

Skt.

i derives

from

IE

a.

The usual

explanation

is

by

'metrische

Dehnung'

(cf.

Schwyzer

1.648):

the

distribution

of

long

and short

vowels

is

determined

by

prosody,

with

i

occurring only

in

syllables

that would

otherwise

be

metrically

short;

thus

bharibharti

:

bharibhrati.

This

may

be

right,

at least

in

part,

as far

as the status

of the

recorded

language

is

concerned.

But

it

is

possible

to show

another source of

the

lengthening

of the

i,

which

may

have

favored the

develop-

ment of

a

lengthened

vowel

in

other

cases.

Sturtevant has shown

(IlH

Laryngeals

68) that the

lengthening

of the re-

duplication syllable

in

the Sanskrit

perfect

type

vdavsa

is

often caused

by

the

original

presence

of an initial

laryngeal

in

the

root;

I

have identified

such

forms

with

the so-called Attic

reduplication

perfects

in

Greek

(Lg.

26.365

ff.).

In the

list

of

roots

forming

this

lengthened

perfect,

we find that

quite

a number

have

intensive

reduplications

of the

type

bharibharti,

e.g.

vaiic-, van-,

vrj-, vrt-,

vrdh-.

We

may

therefore

perhaps

draw

the

conclusion

that

at

least

in

some forms

the

long

i

originated

from

*-iA-,

just

as in

Gk.

6lbriredo.

he later distribution

may

be

merely metrical,

but this

does

not

necessarily

affect

the

origin.

ON

THE

ETYMOLOGY OF

pet

LEO

SPITZER,

JOHNS

HOPKINS UNIVERSITY

The

NED

lists three

different nouns of

the form

pet:

pet,

'a

domesticated,

fondled

young

animal'

(esp.

pet

lamb),'

'a

spoiled child',

attested

from the

16th

to the 18th

century

only

as a

Northern

English (Scottish)

1

Pet

lamb

is

glossed

in

1674-91

'a

cade lamb'.

As

for the

word

cade

itself,

the

explana-

tion

by way

of Fr.

cadel,

attested

by

Cotgrave

in the

meaning

'a

castling,

a

starveling,

one

that hath need

much

of

cockering

and

pampering',

has been

rejected by

the NED

on the

basis

of Paul

Meyer's

statement that the

form

cadel

cannot

be

authentic for

French

(Lat.

catellus would give only chaVl),but only for Provengal. But Meyer was not aware of the

existence of OFr. chadeler

to

direct,

govern'

(from

the

quite

different VL

word

*capitelldre,

with

-p'd-

>

-t-;

cf.

Lat.

sapidus

>

OFr.

sade),

attested in the

Roland

and

found in

Cot-

grave (with

the

meaning

'to

pamper'

and

in

an

obviously

Normandian form

cadeler;

cf.

FEW

s.v.

capitellum),

and

indeed

still

found

in

modern

French

dialects

(ibid.).

On the

basis of a cadeler 'to

pamper',

a cadel

'one

that hath

need ...

of

...

pampering'

has been

This content downloaded from 128.135.12.127 on Tue, 25 Nov 2014 22:37:06 PMAll use subject toJSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


3/7

534 MISCELLANEA

word,

the first

meaning

occurring

n

1539

(certane

ettis,

applied

to

parroquets,

monkeys,

peacocks,

swans),

the second

in

1508.

Of

this

noun

the

NED de-

clares

the

etymon

to be

unknown,

but

probably

different

rom

that

of

peat,

a

noun whichwas in use c. 1570-1640as a termof endearmentorgirls (= 'pet of

a

woman')

and

also

in

the

meaning merry

or

spoiled

girl'.

pet2

(to

be in

a

pet)

'offence

at

being

(or

feeling) slighted',

'a fit of

peevish-

ness',

used from

the

beginning

hroughout

England,

now

obsolescent,

attested

directly

in

1590

in

the

phrase

to take

the

pet, indirectly

n

1552

by

the

adjective

pettish

(which

is

glossed

by

such Latin

words

as

impetuosus,

effraenis,

iracundus).

This word

the

NED

only

tentatively

connects

with

pet1;

by

this

hypothesis

'being

n

a

pet'

would

be

characteristic

f a

pet

child.

pets

breaking

wind,

fart',

attested

only

once

(in Barclay)

n

1515

n

the

phrase

(though

all

their

cunning scantly

be)

worth

a

pet.

This term

is

correctly

traced

by

the NED to Fr.

pet

< Lat.

piditum.

It

does

not

seem to have occurred

o

etymologists

hat all three

words

might

in

reality

be

one,

the

original onceptbeing

that

of

pet3,

which

has a

clear

French

etymology

and

whose use

in

the

phrase

(not)

worth

a

pet

reflects

Old

French

usage:

we are

dealing

with

the realistic

medieval

expression

of a

minimum

quantity (=

'[not]

an

iota'),

attested

for Old

French

by

Dreyling,

Die

Ausdrucksweise

der fibertriebenen

Verkleinerung

6

note

3

(1888):

Je

ne

ti

mesferai

un

pet

(Rom.

de

Renard;

cf.

also

MHG

umb

dich

geb

ich

nit

ein

farz,

ME

bi

alle men

set

I

a

farte),

and

surviving

n

modern

French

dialects

(Rouchi

pete 'peu de chose', H6cart). Skeat was well inspiredwhen he mentioned,in

connection

with

petl,

the French

phrase

mon

peton

used

by

Rabelais

as a

term

of

endearment

or a

child-though

in

translating

he

phrase

'my

little foot'

he

was led

astray2

by

Cotgrave's

definition

of

peton:

a

little

foot,

the

slender

stalk

of a

leafe;

mon

peton,

my

pretty

spryngall,my

gentle

mp

(any

such

flattering

or

dandlingphrase,

bestowed

by

nurses

on their

suckling

boies)'.

In this

entry

the

famous

lexicographer

ombined

he French

derivative

of

pied,

peton

little

foot'

(whose

existence cannot

be

denied,

and which

has survived

in

many

French

dialects

along

with the derivative

verb

petonner

pi6tiner'3)

with

the

phrase

coined as a back-formation. The semantic development of cadeleris parallel, according to

FEW,

to

that of It.

governare

to direct'

>

'to feed

(animals)'.

There is

then

no

reason

why

cade

lamb should

not

go

back

to a

*cadel-lamb.

t

must

be

assumed

that

pet

lamb

(attested

1674-91)

took the

place

of

cade

lamb,

the

adjectival

use

of

pet

echoing

that

of

cade.

[The

term cade

'pet

lamb'

(also

used

as a

call

to

sheep)

is still

current

throughout

Rhode

Island,

as

well as

in

isolated

communities

in

southeastern

Connecticut

and on

Cape

Cod.

See

Linguistic

atlas of

New

England,

Map

202.-BB]

1

He

further

suggests

a

relationship

with Fr.

petit. Although

it

would

be

tempting

to

assume

a

back-formation

petty

>

pet

in Scottish

English,

after

the

peculiarly

Scottish

pattern

seen

in Davie

:

Dave,

this connection

must

be discarded.

English

petty

has a

stylis-

tic

ring quite

different

from that

of the

more

popular

pet:

it

belongs

to the semantic

areas

of

administrative

and

legal

language

(petty oficer,

treason,

larceny),

of

plant

names

(petti-

chaps, petty cotton), or French cuisine (pettitoes < Fr. petite oie; the NED's doubts are

unfounded),

and

of fashions

(petticoat).

3

The

two stems

have sometimes

coalesced

in

popular

consciousness.

Thus

Martellibre

in

his

Glossaire

vend6mois

translates

peter

'pi6tiner,

remuer

s'agiter-Les

chevaux

pbtent

dans

l'6curie,

c'est-A-dire

donnent

des

coups

de

pieds'.

The idea

'kick of a horse'

predomi-

nates also in

Fr.

pitarrade-in

spite

of the

fact that

these

words

originally

referred

to

the

'peditum'

of horses

as

signs

of restlessness.

This content downloaded from 128.135.12.127 on Tue, 25 Nov 2014 22:37:06 PMAll use subject toJSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


4/7

MISCELLANEA 535

found

by

him

in

Rabelais-which

however

may

have had a different

origin.

For

if

we

study

the

passage

of Rabelais in

question

(Pantagruel,

Ch.

3)

more

closely,

we

shall

come

to

the

conclusion

that it is rather

a

derivative

of

pet

'fart' that must have been meant by the author. The situation is as follows.

Gargantua's

wife

Badebec, having

died

in

childbirth,

is

being

mourned

by

her

husband

in

such

comically

erotic terms

as

mon

petit

con

... ma

braguette,

ma

savate,

ma

pantoufle;

then,

turning

to

his new-born

son,

the

healthy

child

Pantagruel (un

si

beau

filz,

tant

joyeux,

tant

riant,

tant

joly),

Gargantua

continues

in

the

same

vein

to

address

the

baby

with the terms mon

coillon,

mon

peton.

It

seems

clear to

me-pace

both Plattard

(in

the Lefranc

edition

of

Rabelais

3,

p.

19

note

12)

and Sain6an

(La

langue

de Rabelais

2.170),

who

follow

Cotgrave

in

their translation

'little

foot'-that

peton

coupled

with coillon

must

be

a more

graphic

word.

Moreover,

as we learn

from

Plattard

(loc.cit.),

the churchman Antoine du

Saix in

1532

quoted, among

those

nursery

words

('mignotises')

which

should

be

avoided

by judicious

parents,

the

phrase

mon

petau-obviously

synonymous

with Rabelais'

mon

peton,

and

showing

a suffix

(-aud)

which

we find used with

derivatives

from Fr.

pet

(see

below),

not from

pied.

Peton

and

petau,

used

as

nursery words,

contain then the

stem

pet.4

At this

point

I

may

quote

from

Ivan Pauli's book

Enfant,

gargon,

fille

(Lund,

1919),

from the

chapter

Termes

scatologiques,

in

which the Swedish

author

lists

the

Romance words

for

'child,

boy,

girl'

traceable to

such

concepts

as

'stercus'

and

'peditum'

(216-23):

Quand il s'agit des derniers n6s, soit des enfants, soit des animaux, la tendance

cacoph6mique

apparatt

tres

nettement. La

piti6

et

la

tendresse,

qu'inspirent

ces

petits

Atres

si

faibles

et si

ch6tifs,

sont

rendues

dans

la

langage

du

peuple par

les

6pith6tes

les

plus

crues.

Dans

le

Poitou,

on

appelle

le

dernier n6

bouze,

dans

la

Provence:

petoun

ou

cago-nis.

La

m~me

expression

se

retrouve dans

le

Doubs

sous

la forme de

chie-nid

(Mont-

b6liard:

tchenni). C'est

probablement

une

allusion au

plus

petit

oiseau

de

la

couv6e

"qui

n'a

pas

la

force

de

faire ses

excr6ments

hors

du

nid,

comme

font

les

autres

au

bout de

quel-

ques jours" (Beauquier).

Le

sicilien dit caca-nidu.

Il

est

interessant

de

trouver

une

expres-

sion tout

'i

fait

correspondante

dans

les

dialectes

su6dois, oil,

d'apres

Rietz,

bo-skit

(ou

bo-fis)

d6signe

"den

senast

f6dde av

valpar

kattungar,

kycklingar

m.

fl.

husdjur."

*One may also consider that for Rabelais the analogy between a healthy new-born

child and

a

'peditum'

was

given

by

the

proverbial

phrase glorieux

comme

un

pet

(attested

by

Gottschalk,

Die

sprichw6rtlichen

Redensarten der frz.

Spr. 155,

for the

15th

century).

Mistral,

s.v.

pet,

explains

the

phrase very cleverly:

'On

dit

en

frangais

"glorieux

comme

un

pet",

qui

chante

dAs

qu'il

est

ne.'

In

the edition of

Lyons

1537

(text

J

according

to the

Lefranc

edition)

we

find,

after

mon

coillon,

mon

peton,

the

words mon voisson.

In

this

noun,

which

means

'fitch, polecat

(Putorius foetidus)'-the

malodorous

animal

par excellence,

the

etymology

from

vesser

(

Documents

Spitzer Etymology of Pet