Subject
Re: AB on metaphysical metaphors
From
Date
Body
On 21/1/07 02:40, "jansymello" <jansy@AETERN.US> wrote:
> Perhaps this story can never be ascertained by concrete facts ( once the
> Church keeps its holy secrets under lock and key) but, for me, it is enough
> that there is a word that describes this "testimonial" ( "testes" plus
> "manus"). It is sufficient proof for me, with or without John or Joan
Jansy: here¹s YET another potential etymological trap. Which came first¹ --
testis as witness, spectator¹ or testis as testicle.¹ ALAS, the common
myth is to assume that testify¹ and testimonial¹ originate from various
reported Biblical and MIS-reported Roman customs of swearing on the
testicles¹ (e.g., grabbing your balls [or the King¹s balls!!] while making
an oath.) The best evidence is that testis as witness¹ came first, from
much earlier Indo-European roots for the NUMBER THREE. The third witness, as
it were, was outside the dispute and could testify/bear witness objectively.
The shift to testis as male gonad¹ is later and metonymic: the balls being
a witness¹ to male virility (not to mention female virility, as in ³Maggie
Thatcher has balls!²) In fact, there¹s no evidence that the Romans handled
their own or other¹s balls as a sign during oath-taking or giving evidence.
It¹s typically inventive folk-etymology that REVERSES the connection from
testicle¹ to testify¹ rather than from testify¹ to testicle!¹ No real
harm, like.
Even the Hebrew Bible¹s references have people swearing on the leader¹s
genitals, not their own. (Ruler James coyly says Put, I pray thee, thy hand
under my THIGH!² Gen 24:2 [yarek, a Hebrew euphemism for the English
euphemism: the generative parts.¹ Interestingly shaba the Hebrew for swear
[an oath]¹ also has a numerical connotation. Literally, you SEVEN the oath,
as though you had repeated it seven times.).
A final quirk (language moves in mysterious ways!) is that testicle¹ is
quite an INSULT, coming from the Latin DIMINUTIVE testiculus whence 14th
century testicules,¹ later testicles¹ losing the sense of TINY BALLS.
Doctors still prefer the full-sized testes!¹ Don¹t we all?
PS: Your "testimonial" ( "testes" plus "manus") is stretching the second
root rather! The -mony¹ and -monial¹ ending have no convincing connection
with mAnus (hand¹) -- more to do with mOn- roots as in monitus pp of monere
to warn, advise, presage¹
Stan Kelly-Bootle
Search the archive: http://listserv.ucsb.edu/archives/nabokv-l.html
Contact the Editors: mailto:nabokv-l@utk.edu,nabokv-l@holycross.edu
Visit Zembla: http://www.libraries.psu.edu/nabokov/zembla.htm
View Nabokv-L policies: http://web.utk.edu/~sblackwe/EDNote.htm
> Perhaps this story can never be ascertained by concrete facts ( once the
> Church keeps its holy secrets under lock and key) but, for me, it is enough
> that there is a word that describes this "testimonial" ( "testes" plus
> "manus"). It is sufficient proof for me, with or without John or Joan
Jansy: here¹s YET another potential etymological trap. Which came first¹ --
testis as witness, spectator¹ or testis as testicle.¹ ALAS, the common
myth is to assume that testify¹ and testimonial¹ originate from various
reported Biblical and MIS-reported Roman customs of swearing on the
testicles¹ (e.g., grabbing your balls [or the King¹s balls!!] while making
an oath.) The best evidence is that testis as witness¹ came first, from
much earlier Indo-European roots for the NUMBER THREE. The third witness, as
it were, was outside the dispute and could testify/bear witness objectively.
The shift to testis as male gonad¹ is later and metonymic: the balls being
a witness¹ to male virility (not to mention female virility, as in ³Maggie
Thatcher has balls!²) In fact, there¹s no evidence that the Romans handled
their own or other¹s balls as a sign during oath-taking or giving evidence.
It¹s typically inventive folk-etymology that REVERSES the connection from
testicle¹ to testify¹ rather than from testify¹ to testicle!¹ No real
harm, like.
Even the Hebrew Bible¹s references have people swearing on the leader¹s
genitals, not their own. (Ruler James coyly says Put, I pray thee, thy hand
under my THIGH!² Gen 24:2 [yarek, a Hebrew euphemism for the English
euphemism: the generative parts.¹ Interestingly shaba the Hebrew for swear
[an oath]¹ also has a numerical connotation. Literally, you SEVEN the oath,
as though you had repeated it seven times.).
A final quirk (language moves in mysterious ways!) is that testicle¹ is
quite an INSULT, coming from the Latin DIMINUTIVE testiculus whence 14th
century testicules,¹ later testicles¹ losing the sense of TINY BALLS.
Doctors still prefer the full-sized testes!¹ Don¹t we all?
PS: Your "testimonial" ( "testes" plus "manus") is stretching the second
root rather! The -mony¹ and -monial¹ ending have no convincing connection
with mAnus (hand¹) -- more to do with mOn- roots as in monitus pp of monere
to warn, advise, presage¹
Stan Kelly-Bootle
Search the archive: http://listserv.ucsb.edu/archives/nabokv-l.html
Contact the Editors: mailto:nabokv-l@utk.edu,nabokv-l@holycross.edu
Visit Zembla: http://www.libraries.psu.edu/nabokov/zembla.htm
View Nabokv-L policies: http://web.utk.edu/~sblackwe/EDNote.htm